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 *

62 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21902139)

  • 1. The results of TKA: what the registries don't tell us.
    Barrack RL
    Orthopedics; 2011 Sep; 34(9):e485-7. PubMed ID: 21902139
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Analysis of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in a community-based implant registry.
    Gioe TJ; Killeen KK; Hoeffel DP; Bert JM; Comfort TK; Scheltema K; Mehle S; Grimm K
    Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2003 Nov; (416):111-9. PubMed ID: 14646749
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Why knees fail in 2011: patient, surgeon, or device?
    Fitzgerald SJ; Trousdale RT
    Orthopedics; 2011 Sep; 34(9):e513-5. PubMed ID: 21902148
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Comparison of survival and cost-effectiveness between unicondylar arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty in patients with primary osteoarthritis: a follow-up study of 50,493 knee replacements from the Finnish Arthroplasty Register.
    Koskinen E; Eskelinen A; Paavolainen P; Pulkkinen P; Remes V
    Acta Orthop; 2008 Aug; 79(4):499-507. PubMed ID: 18766483
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The Norwegian Arthroplasty Register: 11 years and 73,000 arthroplasties.
    Havelin LI; Engesaeter LB; Espehaug B; Furnes O; Lie SA; Vollset SE
    Acta Orthop Scand; 2000 Aug; 71(4):337-53. PubMed ID: 11028881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Revision total hip and knee arthroplasty implant identification: implications for use of Unique Device Identification 2012 AAHKS member survey results.
    Wilson NA; Jehn M; York S; Davis CM
    J Arthroplasty; 2014 Feb; 29(2):251-5. PubMed ID: 23890830
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The financial impact of joint registries in identifying poorly performing implants.
    Luo R; Brekke A; Noble PC
    J Arthroplasty; 2012 Sep; 27(8 Suppl):66-71.e1. PubMed ID: 22682045
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. The Denham prosthesis in revision knee surgery: a 10 year follow-up.
    Banaszkiewicz PA; Finlayson D
    Acta Orthop Belg; 2004 Dec; 70(6):570-7. PubMed ID: 15669458
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The reasons for knee arthroplasty revisions are incomparable in the different arthroplasty registries.
    Niinimäki TT
    Knee; 2015 Mar; 22(2):142-4. PubMed ID: 25596073
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Salvage revision total knee replacement using the Endo-Model rotating hinge prosthesis.
    Pradhan NR; Bale L; Kay P; Porter ML
    Knee; 2004 Dec; 11(6):469-73. PubMed ID: 15581766
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. [Knee arthroplasties performed at Akureyri University Hospital in the years 1983-2003. Results with emphasis on revision and complication rates].
    Hvannberg J; Róbertsson GO; Gestsson J; Ingvarsson T
    Laeknabladid; 2005 Oct; 91(10):739-46. PubMed ID: 16219973
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty: the importance of instrumentation.
    Tria AJ
    Orthop Clin North Am; 2004 Apr; 35(2):227-34. PubMed ID: 15062708
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. New concepts in revision total knee arthroplasty.
    Vince KG; Droll K; Chivas D
    J Surg Orthop Adv; 2008; 17(3):165-72. PubMed ID: 18851801
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Highly cross-linked polyethylene in total knee arthroplasty: in the affirmative.
    Jacofsky DJ
    J Arthroplasty; 2008 Oct; 23(7 Suppl):28-30. PubMed ID: 18701237
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Does implant selection affect outcome of revision knee arthroplasty?
    Bugbee WD; Ammeen DJ; Engh GA
    J Arthroplasty; 2001 Aug; 16(5):581-5. PubMed ID: 11503117
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. [Revision possibilities after failed unicompartmental knee arthroplasty--an analysis of 116 revisions].
    Tinius M; Klima S; Marquass B; Tinius W; Josten C
    Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb; 2006; 144(4):367-72. PubMed ID: 16941293
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Outcome of isolated tibial polyethylene insert exchange after uncemented total knee arthroplasty: 27 patients followed for 8-71 months.
    Jensen CL; Petersen MM; Jensen KE; Therbo M; Schrøder HM
    Acta Orthop; 2006 Dec; 77(6):917-20. PubMed ID: 17260201
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Understanding Orthopaedic Registry Studies: A Comparison with Clinical Studies.
    Inacio MC; Paxton EW; Dillon MT
    J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2016 Jan; 98(1):e3. PubMed ID: 26738910
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.