320 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21324716)
1. Comparison of standard two-dimensional and three-dimensional corrected glenoid version measurements.
Budge MD; Lewis GS; Schaefer E; Coquia S; Flemming DJ; Armstrong AD
J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2011 Jun; 20(4):577-83. PubMed ID: 21324716
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Automated Three-Dimensional Measurement of Glenoid Version and Inclination in Arthritic Shoulders.
Boileau P; Cheval D; Gauci MO; Holzer N; Chaoui J; Walch G
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2018 Jan; 100(1):57-65. PubMed ID: 29298261
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Accuracy of CT-based measurements of glenoid version for total shoulder arthroplasty.
Hoenecke HR; Hermida JC; Flores-Hernandez C; D'Lima DD
J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2010 Mar; 19(2):166-71. PubMed ID: 19959378
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Two-dimensional glenoid version measurements vary with coronal and sagittal scapular rotation.
Bryce CD; Davison AC; Lewis GS; Wang L; Flemming DJ; Armstrong AD
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2010 Mar; 92(3):692-9. PubMed ID: 20194328
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Variability and reliability of 2-dimensional vs. 3-dimensional glenoid version measurements with 3-dimensional preoperative planning software.
Reid JJ; Kunkle BF; Greene AT; Eichinger JK; Friedman RJ
J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2022 Feb; 31(2):302-309. PubMed ID: 34411724
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Reliability of measurements performed on two dimensional and three dimensional computed tomography in glenoid assessment for instability.
Kubicka AM; Stefaniak J; Lubiatowski P; Długosz J; Dzianach M; Redman M; Piontek J; Romanowski L
Int Orthop; 2016 Dec; 40(12):2581-2588. PubMed ID: 27492723
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The effect of sagittal rotation of the glenoid on axial glenoid width and glenoid version in computed tomography scan imaging.
Gross DJ; Golijanin P; Dumont GD; Parada SA; Vopat BG; Reinert SE; Romeo AA; Provencher CD
J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2016 Jan; 25(1):61-8. PubMed ID: 26423023
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Radiographic characterization of the B2 glenoid: the effect of computed tomographic axis orientation.
Chalmers PN; Salazar D; Chamberlain A; Keener JD
J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2017 Feb; 26(2):258-264. PubMed ID: 27592372
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Glenoid version by CT scan: an analysis of clinical measurement error and introduction of a protocol to reduce variability.
van de Bunt F; Pearl ML; Lee EK; Peng L; Didomenico P
Skeletal Radiol; 2015 Nov; 44(11):1627-35. PubMed ID: 26201674
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Use of three-dimensional computed tomography for the analysis of the glenoid anatomy.
Kwon YW; Powell KA; Yum JK; Brems JJ; Iannotti JP
J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2005; 14(1):85-90. PubMed ID: 15723018
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The influence of three-dimensional planning on decision-making in total shoulder arthroplasty.
Werner BS; Hudek R; Burkhart KJ; Gohlke F
J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2017 Aug; 26(8):1477-1483. PubMed ID: 28162884
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparison of glenoid inclination angle using different clinical imaging modalities.
Daggett M; Werner B; Gauci MO; Chaoui J; Walch G
J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2016 Feb; 25(2):180-5. PubMed ID: 26356363
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Glenoid version: how to measure it? Validity of different methods in two-dimensional computed tomography scans.
Rouleau DM; Kidder JF; Pons-Villanueva J; Dynamidis S; Defranco M; Walch G
J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2010 Dec; 19(8):1230-7. PubMed ID: 20452247
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Design and development of a computer assisted glenoid implantation technique for shoulder replacement surgery.
Nguyen D; Ferreira LM; Brownhill JR; Faber KJ; Johnson JA
Comput Aided Surg; 2007 May; 12(3):152-9. PubMed ID: 17538787
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Difference in glenoid retroversion between two-dimensional axial computed tomography and three-dimensional reconstructed images.
Kim H; Yoo CH; Park SB; Song HS
Clin Shoulder Elb; 2020 Jun; 23(2):71-79. PubMed ID: 33330237
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Insufficient consensus regarding circle size and bone loss width using the ratio-"best fit circle"-method even with three-dimensional computed tomography.
Lacheta L; Herbst E; Voss A; Braun S; Jungmann P; Millett PJ; Imhoff A; Martetschläger F
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc; 2019 Oct; 27(10):3222-3229. PubMed ID: 30725122
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Three-dimensional measurement method of arthritic glenoid cavity morphology: feasibility and reproducibility.
Moineau G; Levigne C; Boileau P; Young A; Walch G;
Orthop Traumatol Surg Res; 2012 Oct; 98(6 Suppl):S139-45. PubMed ID: 22964089
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Magnetic Resonance Imaging Correlates With Computed Tomography for Glenoid Version Calculation Despite Lack of Visibility of Medial Scapula.
Parada SA; Shaw KA; Antosh IJ; Eichinger JK; Li X; Curry EJ; Provencher MT
Arthroscopy; 2020 Jan; 36(1):99-105. PubMed ID: 31864608
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Radiographic characterization of the B2 glenoid: is inclusion of the entirety of the scapula necessary?
Chalmers PN; Salazar D; Chamberlain A; Keener JD
J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2017 May; 26(5):855-860. PubMed ID: 28131692
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Glenoid spherical orientation and version.
Lewis GS; Armstrong AD
J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2011 Jan; 20(1):3-11. PubMed ID: 20932782
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
