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)

  • 21. Arthroplasty implant registries over the past five decades: Development, current, and future impact.
    Malchau H; Garellick G; Berry D; Harris WH; Robertson O; Kärrlholm J; Lewallen D; Bragdon CR; Lidgren L; Herberts P
    J Orthop Res; 2018 Sep; 36(9):2319-2330. PubMed ID: 29663575
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Initial experience with the oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.
    Dervin GF; Carruthers C; Feibel RJ; Giachino AA; Kim PR; Thurston PR
    J Arthroplasty; 2011 Feb; 26(2):192-7. PubMed ID: 20667688
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. [Our experience with revision total knee arthroplasty].
    Musil D; Stehlík J; Stárek M
    Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech; 2005; 72(1):6-15. PubMed ID: 15860146
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Variation in outcome and ranking of hospitals: an analysis from the Swedish knee arthroplasty register.
    Robertsson O; Ranstam J; Lidgren L
    Acta Orthop; 2006 Jun; 77(3):487-93. PubMed ID: 16819690
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Why are total knee replacements revised?: analysis of early revision in a community knee implant registry.
    Gioe TJ; Killeen KK; Grimm K; Mehle S; Scheltema K
    Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2004 Nov; (428):100-6. PubMed ID: 15534527
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Low contact stress (LCS) complete knee system in revision surgery.
    Lippe CN; Crossett LS
    Orthopedics; 2006 Sep; 29(9 Suppl):S86-92. PubMed ID: 17002159
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Impact of implant developers on published outcome and reproducibility of cohort-based clinical studies in arthroplasty.
    Labek G; Neumann D; Agreiter M; Schuh R; Böhler N
    J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2011 Dec; 93 Suppl 3():55-61. PubMed ID: 22262425
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Are implant designer series believable? Comparison of survivorship between designer series and national registries.
    Bedair H; Lawless B; Malchau H
    J Arthroplasty; 2013 May; 28(5):728-31. PubMed ID: 23414935
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Revision rates after total ankle arthroplasty in sample-based clinical studies and national registries.
    Labek G; Klaus H; Schlichtherle R; Williams A; Agreiter M
    Foot Ankle Int; 2011 Aug; 32(8):740-5. PubMed ID: 22049859
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Review of clinical outcomes-based anchors of minimum clinically important differences in hip and knee registry-based reports and publications.
    Romero L; Nieuwenhuijse M; Carr A; Sedrakyan A
    J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2014 Dec; 96 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):98-103. PubMed ID: 25520424
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. National projections of time, cost and failure in implantable device identification: Consideration of unique device identification use.
    Wilson N; Broatch J; Jehn M; Davis C
    Healthc (Amst); 2015 Dec; 3(4):196-201. PubMed ID: 26699343
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Design, implementation, and comparison of methods for collecting implant registry data at different hospital types.
    Barsoum WK; Higuera CA; Tellez A; Klika AK; Brooks PJ; Patel PD
    J Arthroplasty; 2012 Jun; 27(6):842-50.e1. PubMed ID: 22285257
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Arthroplasty Registries, Patient Safety and Outlier Surgeons: the case for change.
    Cobb J
    Acta Orthop Belg; 2015 Dec; 81(4):594-9. PubMed ID: 26790779
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. The Benefits of National and Regional Arthroplasty Registries.
    Galea VP; Rojanasopondist P; Matuszak SJ; Connelly JW; Bragdon CR; Paxton L; Malchau H
    Instr Course Lect; 2019; 68():681-694. PubMed ID: 32032065
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. National Joint Replacement Registries: has the time come?
    Maloney WJ
    J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2001 Oct; 83(10):1582-5. PubMed ID: 11679613
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Re: Profiling Individual Surgeon Performance Using Information from a High-Quality Clinical Registry: Opportunities and Limitations.
    Penson DF
    J Urol; 2016 Jun; 195(6):1866-7. PubMed ID: 27191109
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Could Clinical Outcome Registries Bring Us Closer to Consensus?
    Groom RC
    J Extra Corpor Technol; 2016 Jun; 48(2):P29-33. PubMed ID: 27578905
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Radiographic accuracy in TKA with a CT-based patient-specific cutting block technique.
    Koch PP; Müller D; Pisan M; Fucentese SF
    Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc; 2013 Oct; 21(10):2200-5. PubMed ID: 23942882
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Challenges in outcome measurement: clinical research perspective.
    O'Connor DP; Brinker MR
    Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2013 Nov; 471(11):3496-503. PubMed ID: 23884806
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. 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]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.