291 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21511258)
1. Influence of interface condition and implant design on bone remodelling and failure risk for the resurfaced femoral head.
Rothstock S; Uhlenbrock A; Bishop N; Laird L; Nassutt R; Morlock M
J Biomech; 2011 Jun; 44(9):1646-53. PubMed ID: 21511258
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Bone remodelling inside a cemented resurfaced femoral head.
Gupta S; New AM; Taylor M
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2006 Jul; 21(6):594-602. PubMed ID: 16542761
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Influence of the change in stem length on the load transfer and bone remodelling for a cemented resurfaced femur.
Pal B; Gupta S; New AM
J Biomech; 2010 Nov; 43(15):2908-14. PubMed ID: 20728891
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. A numerical study of failure mechanisms in the cemented resurfaced femur: effects of interface characteristics and bone remodelling.
Pal B; Gupta S; New AM
Proc Inst Mech Eng H; 2009 May; 223(4):471-84. PubMed ID: 19499837
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The effect of primary stability on load transfer and bone remodelling within the uncemented resurfaced femur.
Pal B; Gupta S
Proc Inst Mech Eng H; 2011 Jun; 225(6):549-61. PubMed ID: 22034739
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. [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]
7. The possibilities of uncemented glenoid component--a finite element study.
Gupta S; van der Helm FC; van Keulen F
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2004 Mar; 19(3):292-302. PubMed ID: 15003345
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Primary stability of uncemented femoral resurfacing implants for varying interface parameters and material formulations during walking and stair climbing.
Rothstock S; Uhlenbrock A; Bishop N; Morlock M
J Biomech; 2010 Feb; 43(3):521-6. PubMed ID: 19913227
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Biomechanics of the Birmingham hip resurfacing arthroplasty.
Ong KL; Kurtz SM; Manley MT; Rushton N; Mohammed NA; Field RE
J Bone Joint Surg Br; 2006 Aug; 88(8):1110-5. PubMed ID: 16877617
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Strain adaptive bone remodelling: influence of the implantation technique.
Behrens BA; Bouguecha A; Nolte I; Meyer-Lindenberg A; Stukenborg-Colsman C; Pressel T
Stud Health Technol Inform; 2008; 133():33-44. PubMed ID: 18376011
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Investigation into the effect of varus-valgus orientation on load transfer in the resurfaced femoral head: a multi-femur finite element analysis.
Radcliffe IA; Taylor M
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2007 Aug; 22(7):780-6. PubMed ID: 17544555
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The biomechanical consequence of insufficient femoral component lateralization and exposed cancellous bone in hip resurfacing arthroplasty.
Olsen M; Davis ET; Whyne CM; Zdero R; Schemitsch EH
J Biomech Eng; 2010 Aug; 132(8):081011. PubMed ID: 20670060
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparison of different hip prosthesis shapes considering micro-level bone remodeling and stress-shielding criteria using three-dimensional design space topology optimization.
Boyle C; Kim IY
J Biomech; 2011 Jun; 44(9):1722-8. PubMed ID: 21497816
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. [Cementless socket fixation based on the "press-fit" concept in total hip joint arthroplasty].
Morscher EW; Widmer KH; Bereiter H; Elke R; Schenk R
Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech; 2002; 69(1):8-15. PubMed ID: 11951572
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Design considerations for ceramic resurfaced femoral head: effect of interface characteristics on failure mechanisms.
Pal B; Gupta S; New AM
Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin; 2010; 13(2):143-55. PubMed ID: 19787497
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Quantification of implant micromotion, strain shielding, and bone resorption with porous-coated anatomic medullary locking femoral prostheses.
Engh CA; O'Connor D; Jasty M; McGovern TF; Bobyn JD; Harris WH
Clin Orthop Relat Res; 1992 Dec; (285):13-29. PubMed ID: 1446429
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The effects of interfacial conditions and stem length on potential failure mechanisms in the uncemented resurfaced femur.
Gupta S; Pal B; New AM
Ann Biomed Eng; 2010 Jun; 38(6):2107-20. PubMed ID: 20309732
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The influence of tibial component fixation techniques on resorption of supporting bone stock after total knee replacement.
Chong DY; Hansen UN; van der Venne R; Verdonschot N; Amis AA
J Biomech; 2011 Mar; 44(5):948-54. PubMed ID: 21236431
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Cortical and interfacial bone changes around a non-cemented hip implant: simulations using a combined strain/damage remodelling algorithm.
Scannell PT; Prendergast PJ
Med Eng Phys; 2009 May; 31(4):477-88. PubMed ID: 19188086
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
