288 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19307048)
1. Biomechanical evaluation of two types of short-stemmed hip prostheses compared to the trust plate prosthesis by three-dimensional measurement of micromotions.
Fottner A; Schmid M; Birkenmaier C; Mazoochian F; Plitz W; Volkmar J
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2009 Jun; 24(5):429-34. PubMed ID: 19307048
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Migration and cyclic motion of a new short-stemmed hip prosthesis--a biomechanical in vitro study.
Westphal FM; Bishop N; Honl M; Hille E; Püschel K; Morlock MM
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2006 Oct; 21(8):834-40. PubMed ID: 16806616
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. [Photoelastic stress analysis of human femurs before and after implantation of different models of femur neck prostheses].
Wieners G; Pech M; Streitparth F; Jansson V; Plitz W
Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb; 2007; 145(1):81-7. PubMed ID: 17345548
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Biomechanical evaluation of different offset versions of a cementless hip prosthesis by 3-dimensional measurement of micromotions.
Fottner A; Peter CV; Schmidutz F; Wanke-Jellinek L; Schröder C; Mazoochian F; Jansson V
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2011 Oct; 26(8):830-5. PubMed ID: 21536357
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. [Noncemented total hip arthroplasty: influence of extramedullary parameters on initial implant stability and on bone-implant interface stresses].
Ramaniraka NA; Rakotomanana LR; Rubin PJ; Leyvraz P
Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot; 2000 Oct; 86(6):590-7. PubMed ID: 11060433
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Biomechanical comparison of newly designed stemless prosthesis and conventional hip prosthesis--an experimental study.
Tai CL; Lee MS; Chen WP; Hsieh PH; Lee PC; Shih CH
Biomed Mater Eng; 2005; 15(3):239-49. PubMed ID: 15912004
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Do short-stemmed-prostheses induce periprosthetic fractures earlier than standard hip stems? A biomechanical ex-vivo study of two different stem designs.
Jakubowitz E; Seeger JB; Lee C; Heisel C; Kretzer JP; Thomsen MN
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg; 2009 Jun; 129(6):849-55. PubMed ID: 18568351
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Changes in strain distribution of loaded proximal femora caused by different types of cementless femoral stems.
Decking R; Puhl W; Simon U; Claes LE
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2006 Jun; 21(5):495-501. PubMed ID: 16457913
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Biomechanics of a short stem: In vitro primary stability and stress shielding of a conservative cementless hip stem.
Bieger R; Ignatius A; Reichel H; Dürselen L
J Orthop Res; 2013 Aug; 31(8):1180-6. PubMed ID: 23553802
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Stress analysis of the interface between cervical vertebrae end plates and the Bryan, Prestige LP, and ProDisc-C cervical disc prostheses: an in vivo image-based finite element study.
Lin CY; Kang H; Rouleau JP; Hollister SJ; Marca FL
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2009 Jul; 34(15):1554-60. PubMed ID: 19564765
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Influence of changes in stem positioning on femoral loading after THR using a short-stemmed hip implant.
Speirs AD; Heller MO; Taylor WR; Duda GN; Perka C
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2007 May; 22(4):431-9. PubMed ID: 17275151
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Finite element modeling of resurfacing hip prosthesis: estimation of accuracy through experimental validation.
Taddei F; Martelli S; Gill HS; Cristofolini L; Viceconti M
J Biomech Eng; 2010 Feb; 132(2):021002. PubMed ID: 20370239
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Load-shift--numerical evaluation of a new design philosophy for uncemented hip prostheses.
Goetzen N; Lampe F; Nassut R; Morlock MM
J Biomech; 2005 Mar; 38(3):595-604. PubMed ID: 15652559
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Stemmed femoral knee prostheses: effects of prosthetic design and fixation on bone loss.
van Lenthe GH; Willems MM; Verdonschot N; de Waal Malefijt MC; Huiskes R
Acta Orthop Scand; 2002 Dec; 73(6):630-7. PubMed ID: 12553509
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Influence of material coupling and assembly condition on the magnitude of micromotion at the stem-neck interface of a modular hip endoprosthesis.
Jauch SY; Huber G; Hoenig E; Baxmann M; Grupp TM; Morlock MM
J Biomech; 2011 Jun; 44(9):1747-51. PubMed ID: 21531416
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. [Biomechanical experiment of non-stemmed anatomical total hip prosthesis arthroplasty in vitro].
Fei Q; Hong S; Chen T; Chen Z; Qian B
Sheng Wu Yi Xue Gong Cheng Xue Za Zhi; 2005 Feb; 22(1):104-7. PubMed ID: 15762127
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Primary stability of a robodoc implanted anatomical stem versus manual implantation.
Nogler M; Polikeit A; Wimmer C; Brückner A; Ferguson SJ; Krismer M
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2004 Feb; 19(2):123-9. PubMed ID: 14967574
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Can the rasp be used to predict intra-operatively the primary stability that can be achieved by press-fitting the stem in cementless hip arthroplasty?
Varini E; Cristofolini L; Traina F; Viceconti M; Toni A
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2008 May; 23(4):408-14. PubMed ID: 18068878
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Assessment of femoral neck fracture risk for a novel proximal epiphyseal hip prosthesis.
Cristofolini L; Juszczyk M; Taddei F; Field RE; Rushton N; Viceconti M
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2011 Jul; 26(6):585-91. PubMed ID: 21334123
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The effect of modular tapered fluted stems on proximal stress shielding in the human femur.
Hnat WP; Conway JS; Malkani AL; Yakkanti MR; Voor MJ
J Arthroplasty; 2009 Sep; 24(6):957-62. PubMed ID: 18848422
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
