These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
240 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17279045)
1. Unconstrained tripolar hip implants: effect on hip stability. Guyen O; Chen QS; Bejui-Hugues J; Berry DJ; An KN Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2007 Feb; 455():202-8. PubMed ID: 17279045 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. [Method for the evaluation of factors influencing the dislocation stability of total hip endoprotheses]. Bader R; Scholz R; Steinhauser E; Busch R; Mittelmeier W Biomed Tech (Berl); 2004 May; 49(5):137-44. PubMed ID: 15212199 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Bony impingement affects range of motion after total hip arthroplasty: A subject-specific approach. Kessler O; Patil S; Wirth S; Mayr E; Colwell CW; D'Lima DD J Orthop Res; 2008 Apr; 26(4):443-52. PubMed ID: 18050356 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Influence of total hip design on dislocation: a computer model and clinical analysis. Padgett DE; Lipman J; Robie B; Nestor BJ Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2006 Jun; 447():48-52. PubMed ID: 16741474 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Influence of femoral head size on impingement, dislocation and stress distribution in total hip replacement. Kluess D; Martin H; Mittelmeier W; Schmitz KP; Bader R Med Eng Phys; 2007 May; 29(4):465-71. PubMed ID: 16901743 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. [Experimental analysis of neutral, asymmetric and constraint liners for total hip replacement: investigation of range of motion and protection against joint instability]. Bader R; Steinhauser E; Scholz R; Simnacher M; Mittelmeier W Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb; 2004; 142(5):577-85. PubMed ID: 15472768 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Factors affecting hip range of motion in surface replacement arthroplasty. Vendittoli PA; Ganapathi M; Nuño N; Plamondon D; Lavigne M Clin Biomech (Bristol); 2007 Nov; 22(9):1004-12. PubMed ID: 17870221 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Impingement after total hip arthroplasty related to prosthetic component selection and range of motion. Gondi G; Roberson JR; Ganey TM; Shahriari A; Hutton WC J South Orthop Assoc; 1997; 6(4):266-72. PubMed ID: 9434247 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Limited range of motion of hip resurfacing arthroplasty due to unfavorable ratio of prosthetic head size and femoral neck diameter. Kluess D; Zietz C; Lindner T; Mittelmeier W; Schmitz KP; Bader R Acta Orthop; 2008 Dec; 79(6):748-54. PubMed ID: 19085490 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A computer model of the position of the combined component in the prevention of impingement in total hip replacement. Barsoum WK; Patterson RW; Higuera C; Klika AK; Krebs VE; Molloy R J Bone Joint Surg Br; 2007 Jun; 89(6):839-45. PubMed ID: 17613516 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The influence of the oscillation angle and the neck anteversion of the prosthesis on the cup safe-zone that fulfills the criteria for range of motion in total hip replacements. The required oscillation angle for an acceptable cup safe-zone. Yoshimine F J Biomech; 2005 Jan; 38(1):125-32. PubMed ID: 15519347 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Guidelines for implant placement to minimize impingement during activities of daily living after total hip arthroplasty. Patel AB; Wagle RR; Usrey MM; Thompson MT; Incavo SJ; Noble PC J Arthroplasty; 2010 Dec; 25(8):1275-81.e1. PubMed ID: 20022449 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The safe-zones for combined cup and neck anteversions that fulfill the essential range of motion and their optimum combination in total hip replacements. Yoshimine F J Biomech; 2006; 39(7):1315-23. PubMed ID: 15894324 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. An in vivo model for intraoperative assessment of impingement and dislocation in total hip arthroplasty. Tanino H; Ito H; Harman MK; Matsuno T; Hodge WA; Banks SA J Arthroplasty; 2008 Aug; 23(5):714-20. PubMed ID: 18534546 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Effects of the femoral offset and the head size on the safe range of motion in total hip arthroplasty. Matsushita A; Nakashima Y; Jingushi S; Yamamoto T; Kuraoka A; Iwamoto Y J Arthroplasty; 2009 Jun; 24(4):646-51. PubMed ID: 18534445 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. [Analytical computational model for the determination of the influence of design and surgical factors on the range of motion of total hip replacements]. Kliewe C; Souffrant R; Kluess D; Woernle C; Brökel K; Bader R Biomed Tech (Berl); 2010 Feb; 55(1):47-55. PubMed ID: 20128745 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Analysis of optimal range of socket orientations in total hip arthroplasty with use of computer-aided design simulation. Seki M; Yuasa N; Ohkuni K J Orthop Res; 1998 Jul; 16(4):513-7. PubMed ID: 9747795 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Effect of acetabular component anteversion on dislocation mechanisms in total hip arthroplasty. Higa M; Tanino H; Abo M; Kakunai S; Banks SA J Biomech; 2011 Jun; 44(9):1810-3. PubMed ID: 21529811 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Effect of elevated-rim acetabular liner and 32-mm femoral head on stability in total hip arthroplasty. Qassem DM; Smith KB Saudi Med J; 2004 Jan; 25(1):88-90. PubMed ID: 14758388 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Large diameter heads: is bigger always better? Rodriguez JA; Rathod PA J Bone Joint Surg Br; 2012 Nov; 94(11 Suppl A):52-4. PubMed ID: 23118381 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]