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 *

260 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19651827)

  • 41. The influence of head size and sex on the outcome of Birmingham hip resurfacing.
    McBryde CW; Theivendran K; Thomas AM; Treacy RB; Pynsent PB
    J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2010 Jan; 92(1):105-12. PubMed ID: 20048102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Minimum ten-year follow-up of cemented total hip replacement in patients with osteonecrosis of the femoral head.
    Fyda TM; Callaghan JJ; Olejniczak J; Johnston RC
    Iowa Orthop J; 2002; 22():8-19. PubMed ID: 12180617
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Increased risk of revision in patients with non-traumatic femoral head necrosis.
    Bergh C; Fenstad AM; Furnes O; Garellick G; Havelin LI; Overgaard S; Pedersen AB; Mäkelä KT; Pulkkinen P; Mohaddes M; Kärrholm J
    Acta Orthop; 2014 Feb; 85(1):11-7. PubMed ID: 24359026
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Survivorship and clinical outcome of Birmingham hip resurfacing: a minimum ten years' follow-up.
    Azam MQ; McMahon S; Hawdon G; Sankineani SR
    Int Orthop; 2016 Jan; 40(1):1-7. PubMed ID: 25820838
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Femoral neck fracture after Birmingham Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty: prevalence, time to fracture, and outcome after revision.
    Matharu GS; McBryde CW; Revell MP; Pynsent PB
    J Arthroplasty; 2013 Jan; 28(1):147-53. PubMed ID: 22819379
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Revision of Failed Metal-on-Metal Total Hip Arthroplasty: Midterm Outcomes of 203 Consecutive Cases.
    Crawford DA; Adams JB; Morris MJ; Berend KR; Lombardi AV
    J Arthroplasty; 2019 Aug; 34(8):1755-1760. PubMed ID: 31053470
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. [Mid- and long-term effectiveness and failure causes analysis of large-head metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty].
    Li J; Zhou K; Chen Z; Wang D; Zhou Z; Kang P; Shen B; Yang J; Pei F
    Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi; 2017 Feb; 31(2):144-149. PubMed ID: 29786243
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Is There a Difference in Revision Risk Between Metal and Ceramic Heads on Highly Crosslinked Polyethylene Liners?
    Cafri G; Paxton EW; Love R; Bini SA; Kurtz SM
    Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2017 May; 475(5):1349-1355. PubMed ID: 27385222
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. What Is the Rerevision Rate After Revising a Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty? Analysis From the AOANJRR.
    Wong JM; Liu YL; Graves S; de Steiger R
    Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2015 Nov; 473(11):3458-64. PubMed ID: 25721576
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Treatment of periprosthetic femoral fractures following total hip arthroplasty with femoral component revision.
    Springer BD; Berry DJ; Lewallen DG
    J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2003 Nov; 85(11):2156-62. PubMed ID: 14630846
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. A 5-year survival analysis of 160 Biomet Magnum M2 metal-on-metal total hip prostheses.
    Koper MC; Mathijssen NM; Vehmeijer SB
    Hip Int; 2016; 26(1):50-6. PubMed ID: 26541184
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Five-year results of the ASR XL Acetabular System and the ASR Hip Resurfacing System: an analysis from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry.
    de Steiger RN; Hang JR; Miller LN; Graves SE; Davidson DC
    J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2011 Dec; 93(24):2287-93. PubMed ID: 22258775
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Poor outcome of revised resurfacing hip arthroplasty.
    de Steiger RN; Miller LN; Prosser GH; Graves SE; Davidson DC; Stanford TE
    Acta Orthop; 2010 Feb; 81(1):72-6. PubMed ID: 20170416
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Metal-on-metal surface replacement: a triumph of hope over reason: affirms.
    Cuckler JM
    Orthopedics; 2011 Sep; 34(9):e439-41. PubMed ID: 21902124
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. [Short- and medium-term effectivenesses of stemless hip arthroplasty for treating hip joint disease in young and middle-aged patients].
    Chen Q; Liu W; Gao H; Shi M; Lian Y
    Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi; 2014 Sep; 28(9):1062-5. PubMed ID: 25509766
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Risk factor analysis for early femoral failure in metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty: the effect of bone density and body mass index.
    Gross TP; Liu F
    J Orthop Surg Res; 2012 Jan; 7():1. PubMed ID: 22233783
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Birmingham hip resurfacing at a mean of ten years: results from an independent centre.
    Coulter G; Young DA; Dalziel RE; Shimmin AJ
    J Bone Joint Surg Br; 2012 Mar; 94(3):315-21. PubMed ID: 22371536
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Revision of metal-on-metal resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip: the influence of malpositioning of the components.
    De Haan R; Campbell PA; Su EP; De Smet KA
    J Bone Joint Surg Br; 2008 Sep; 90(9):1158-63. PubMed ID: 18757954
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Revision of Metal-on-metal Hip Prostheses Results in Marked Reduction of Blood Cobalt and Chromium Ion Concentrations.
    Lainiala O; Reito A; Elo P; Pajamäki J; Puolakka T; Eskelinen A
    Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2015 Jul; 473(7):2305-13. PubMed ID: 25623595
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Outcome of hip resurfacing revision through the Hueter-anterior approach.
    Ricard MA; Ardell J; Laboudie P; Wei R; Beaulé PE
    Hip Int; 2024 May; 34(3):356-362. PubMed ID: 37795633
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 13.