212 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21119165)
1. A critique of revision rate as an outcome measure: re-interpretation of knee joint registry data.
Goodfellow JW; O'Connor JJ; Murray DW
J Bone Joint Surg Br; 2010 Dec; 92(12):1628-31. PubMed ID: 21119165
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Survival and functional outcome after revision of a unicompartmental to a total knee replacement: the New Zealand National Joint Registry.
Pearse AJ; Hooper GJ; Rothwell A; Frampton C
J Bone Joint Surg Br; 2010 Apr; 92(4):508-12. PubMed ID: 20357326
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. An analysis of the Oxford hip and knee scores and their relationship to early joint revision in the New Zealand Joint Registry.
Rothwell AG; Hooper GJ; Hobbs A; Frampton CM
J Bone Joint Surg Br; 2010 Mar; 92(3):413-8. PubMed ID: 20190314
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Revision of Oxford medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty to total knee arthroplasty - results of a multicentre study.
Saldanha KA; Keys GW; Svard UC; White SH; Rao C
Knee; 2007 Aug; 14(4):275-9. PubMed ID: 17524650
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Osteotomy and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty converted to total knee arthroplasty: data from the New Zealand Joint Registry.
Pearse AJ; Hooper GJ; Rothwell AG; Frampton C
J Arthroplasty; 2012 Dec; 27(10):1827-31. PubMed ID: 23063514
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Revision of failed unicompartmental knee replacement to total knee replacement.
Chou DT; Swamy GN; Lewis JR; Badhe NP
Knee; 2012 Aug; 19(4):356-9. PubMed ID: 21636281
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Patients Receiving a Primary Unicompartmental Knee Replacement Have a Higher Risk of Revision but a Lower Risk of Mortality Than Predicted Had They Received a Total Knee Replacement: Data From the National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland, and the Isle of Man.
Hunt LP; Blom AW; Matharu GS; Kunutsor SK; Beswick AD; Wilkinson JM; Whitehouse MR
J Arthroplasty; 2021 Feb; 36(2):471-477.e6. PubMed ID: 33011013
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparison of patient-reported outcome measures following total and unicondylar knee replacement.
Baker PN; Petheram T; Jameson SS; Avery PJ; Reed MR; Gregg PJ; Deehan DJ
J Bone Joint Surg Br; 2012 Jul; 94(7):919-27. PubMed ID: 22733946
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The Effect of Surgeon Caseload on the Relative Revision Rate of Cemented and Cementless Unicompartmental Knee Replacements: An Analysis from the National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man.
Mohammad HR; Matharu GS; Judge A; Murray DW
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2020 Apr; 102(8):644-653. PubMed ID: 32004190
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A matched comparison of cementless unicompartmental and total knee replacement outcomes based on the National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man.
Mohammad HR; Judge A; Murray DW
Acta Orthop; 2022 May; 93():478-487. PubMed ID: 35611477
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Effect of Surgical Caseload on Revision Rate Following Total and Unicompartmental Knee Replacement.
Liddle AD; Pandit H; Judge A; Murray DW
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2016 Jan; 98(1):1-8. PubMed ID: 26738897
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Unicompartmental or total knee replacement: the 15-year results of a prospective randomised controlled trial.
Newman J; Pydisetty RV; Ackroyd C
J Bone Joint Surg Br; 2009 Jan; 91(1):52-7. PubMed ID: 19092004
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Outcome of revision UKR to TKR when compared to a matched group of TKR of same total arthroplasty lifespan.
Jonas SC; Jermin P; Howells N; Porteous A; Murray J; Robinson J
Knee; 2019 Mar; 26(2):400-404. PubMed ID: 30792107
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Minimally invasive Oxford phase 3 unicompartmental knee replacement: results of 1000 cases.
Pandit H; Jenkins C; Gill HS; Barker K; Dodd CA; Murray DW
J Bone Joint Surg Br; 2011 Feb; 93(2):198-204. PubMed ID: 21282759
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 5-Year cost/benefit analysis of revision of failed unicompartmental knee replacements (UKRs); not "just" a primary total knee replacement (TKR).
Jonas SC; Shah R; Mitra A; Deo SD
Knee; 2014 Aug; 21(4):840-2. PubMed ID: 24857690
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Revision of medial Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement to a total knee replacement: similar to a primary?
Wynn Jones H; Chan W; Harrison T; Smith TO; Masonda P; Walton NP
Knee; 2012 Aug; 19(4):339-43. PubMed ID: 21531140
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. A matched comparison of the patient-reported outcome measures of 38,716 total and unicompartmental knee replacements: an analysis of linked data from the National Joint Registry of England, Northern Ireland and Isle of Man and England's National PROM collection programme.
Mohammad HR; Judge A; Murray DW
Acta Orthop; 2021 Dec; 92(6):701-708. PubMed ID: 34309481
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Adverse outcomes after total and unicompartmental knee replacement in 101,330 matched patients: a study of data from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales.
Liddle AD; Judge A; Pandit H; Murray DW
Lancet; 2014 Oct; 384(9952):1437-45. PubMed ID: 25012116
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. A matched comparison of revision rates of cemented Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Replacements with Single and Twin Peg femoral components, based on data from the National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man.
Mohammad HR; Matharu GS; Judge A; Murray DW
Acta Orthop; 2020 Aug; 91(4):420-425. PubMed ID: 32420778
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The survivorship and results of total knee replacements converted from unicompartmental knee replacements.
Johnson S; Jones P; Newman JH
Knee; 2007 Mar; 14(2):154-7. PubMed ID: 17276070
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
