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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

140 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19404792)

  • 1. In vitro influence of stem surface finish and mantle conformity on pressure generation in cemented hip arthroplasty.
    Bartlett GE; Gill HS; Murray DW; Beard DJ
    Acta Orthop; 2009 Apr; 80(2):139-43. PubMed ID: 19404792
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. In vitro comparison of the effects of rough and polished stem surface finish on pressure generation in cemented hip arthroplasty.
    Bartlett GE; Beard DJ; Murray DW; Gill HS
    Acta Orthop; 2009 Apr; 80(2):144-9. PubMed ID: 19404793
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Initial stability of cemented femoral stems as a function of surface finish, collar, and stem size.
    Ebramzadeh E; Sangiorgio SN; Longjohn DB; Buhari CF; Dorr LD
    J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2004 Jan; 86(1):106-15. PubMed ID: 14711952
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Surface roughness of debonded straight-tapered stems in cemented THA reduces subsidence but not cement damage.
    Verdonschot N; Huiskes R
    Biomaterials; 1998 Oct; 19(19):1773-9. PubMed ID: 9856588
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Fluid flow around model femoral components of differing surface finishes: in vitro investigations.
    Crawford RW; Evans M; Ling RS; Murray DW
    Acta Orthop Scand; 1999 Dec; 70(6):589-95. PubMed ID: 10665724
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A rough surface finish adversely affects the survivorship of a cemented femoral stem.
    Della Valle AG; Zoppi A; Peterson MG; Salvati EA
    Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2005 Jul; (436):158-63. PubMed ID: 15995435
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. In-vitro characteristics of cemented titanium femoral stems with a smooth surface finish.
    Akiyama H; Yamamoto K; Kaneuji A; Matsumoto T; Nakamura T
    J Orthop Sci; 2013 Jan; 18(1):29-37. PubMed ID: 22945910
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Periprosthetic fractures around polished collarless cemented stems: the effect of stem design on fracture pattern.
    Erhardt JB; Khoo PP; Stoffel KK; Yates PJ
    Hip Int; 2013; 23(5):459-64. PubMed ID: 23813164
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Polished vs rough femoral components in grade A and grade C-2 cement mantles.
    Duffy GP; Lozynsky AJ; Harris WH
    J Arthroplasty; 2006 Oct; 21(7):1054-63. PubMed ID: 17027551
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Polished Cemented Femoral Stems Have a Lower Rate of Revision Than Matt Finished Cemented Stems in Total Hip Arthroplasty: An Analysis of 96,315 Cemented Femoral Stems.
    Hoskins W; van Bavel D; Lorimer M; de Steiger RN
    J Arthroplasty; 2018 May; 33(5):1472-1476. PubMed ID: 29310918
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Effects of prosthesis surface roughness on the failure process of cemented hip implants after stem-cement debonding.
    Verdonschot N; Tanck E; Huiskes R
    J Biomed Mater Res; 1998 Dec; 42(4):554-9. PubMed ID: 9827679
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The femoral stem pump in cemented hip arthroplasty: an in vitro model.
    Bartlett GE; Beard DJ; Murray DW; Gill HS
    Med Eng Phys; 2008 Oct; 30(8):1042-8. PubMed ID: 18280197
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Stem subsidence of polished and rough double-taper stems: in vitro mechanical effects on the cement-bone interface.
    Kaneuji A; Yamada K; Hirosaki K; Takano M; Matsumoto T
    Acta Orthop; 2009 Jun; 80(3):270-6. PubMed ID: 19421909
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Stem surface roughness alters creep induced subsidence and 'taper-lock' in a cemented femoral hip prosthesis.
    Norman TL; Thyagarajan G; Saligrama VC; Gruen TA; Blaha JD
    J Biomech; 2001 Oct; 34(10):1325-33. PubMed ID: 11522312
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Challenges in relating experimental hip implant fixation predictions to clinical observations.
    Sangiorgio SN; Longjohn DB; Dorr LD; Ebramzadeh E
    J Biomech; 2011 Jan; 44(2):235-43. PubMed ID: 21040920
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The relationship between cement fatigue damage and implant surface finish in proximal femoral prostheses.
    Lennon AB; McCormack BA; Prendergast PJ
    Med Eng Phys; 2003 Dec; 25(10):833-41. PubMed ID: 14630471
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. In vitro cyclic testing of the Exeter stem after cement within cement revision.
    Wilson LJ; Bell CG; Weinrauch P; Crawford R
    J Arthroplasty; 2009 Aug; 24(5):789-94. PubMed ID: 18534400
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Mechanical aspects of degree of cement bonding and implant wedge effect.
    Yoon YS; Oxland TR; Hodgson AJ; Duncan CP; Masri BA; Choi D
    Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2008 Nov; 23(9):1141-7. PubMed ID: 18584929
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Effects of total hip arthroplasty cemented femoral stem surface finish, collar and cement thickness on load transfer to the femur.
    Ebramzadeh E; Sangiorgio SN; Longjohn DB; Buhari CF; Morrison BJ; Dorr LD
    J Appl Biomater Biomech; 2003; 1(1):76-83. PubMed ID: 20803475
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Total hip arthroplasty with satin finish, tapered stems.
    Ritter MA; Harty LD; Lorenzo RA; Lutgring JD
    Orthopedics; 2005 Dec; 28(12):1454-6. PubMed ID: 16366085
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.