2985 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23515989)
1. Fixation, survival, and dislocation of jumbo acetabular components in revision hip arthroplasty.
Lachiewicz PF; Soileau ES
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2013 Mar; 95(6):543-8. PubMed ID: 23515989
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Uncemented jumbo cups for revision total hip arthroplasty: a concise follow-up, at a mean of twenty years, of a previous report.
von Roth P; Abdel MP; Harmsen WS; Berry DJ
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2015 Feb; 97(4):284-7. PubMed ID: 25695978
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Charnley total hip arthroplasty with use of improved techniques of cementing. The results after a minimum of fifteen years of follow-up.
Madey SM; Callaghan JJ; Olejniczak JP; Goetz DD; Johnston RC
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 1997 Jan; 79(1):53-64. PubMed ID: 9010186
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. LUMiC
Bus MP; Szafranski A; Sellevold S; Goryn T; Jutte PC; Bramer JA; Fiocco M; Streitbürger A; Kotrych D; van de Sande MA; Dijkstra PD
Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2017 Mar; 475(3):686-695. PubMed ID: 27020434
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. [Oblong acetabular cup, type TC, for revision total hip arthroplasty].
Trč T; Stastný E
Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech; 2012; 79(6):506-11. PubMed ID: 23286682
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. [Long-term results of the CLS acetabular cup in primary total hip replacement].
Rozkydal Z; Janícek P; Tomás T; Florian Z
Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech; 2009 Apr; 76(2):90-7. PubMed ID: 19439127
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Tantalum Components in Difficult Acetabular Revisions Have Good Survival at 5 to 10 Years: Longer Term Followup of a Previous Report.
Lachiewicz PF; O'Dell JA
Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2018 Feb; 476(2):336-342. PubMed ID: 29529665
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Acetabular Revision Arthroplasty Using an Uncemented Deep Profile Jumbo Component: A Ten to Sixteen Year Follow-Up Study.
McLaughlin JR; Lee KR
J Arthroplasty; 2018 Feb; 33(2):496-499. PubMed ID: 28993083
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Comparative long-term survivorship of uncemented acetabular components in revision total hip arthroplasty.
Kremers HM; Howard JL; Loechler Y; Schleck CD; Harmsen WS; Berry DJ; Cabanela ME; Hanssen AD; Pagnano MW; Trousdale RT; Lewallen DG
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2012 Jun; 94(12):e82. PubMed ID: 22717834
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Mid-Term Follow-Up of Acetabular Revision Arthroplasty Using Jumbo Cups.
Zhang J; Huang Y; Zhou B; Zhou Y
Orthop Surg; 2019 Oct; 11(5):811-818. PubMed ID: 31549788
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Polyethylene Liner and Femoral Head Exchange in Total Hip Arthroplasty: Factors Associated with Long-Term Success and Failure.
Petis SM; Kubista B; Hartzler RU; Abdel MP; Berry DJ
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2019 Mar; 101(5):421-428. PubMed ID: 30845036
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Extra-large uncemented hemispherical acetabular components for revision total hip arthroplasty.
Whaley AL; Berry DJ; Harmsen WS
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2001 Sep; 83(9):1352-7. PubMed ID: 11568198
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Ceramic-on-ceramic THA associated with fewer dislocations and less muscle degeneration by preserving muscle progenitors.
Hernigou P; Roussignol X; Delambre J; Poignard A; Flouzat-Lachaniette CH
Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2015 Dec; 473(12):3762-9. PubMed ID: 26054482
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Is there a problem with modular dual mobility acetabular components in revision total hip arthroplasty at mid-term follow-up?
Hernandez NM; Hinton ZW; Wu CJ; Lachiewicz PF; Ryan SP; Wellman SS
Bone Joint J; 2021 Jul; 103-B(7 Supple B):66-72. PubMed ID: 34192910
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The use of a long stem cemented femoral component in revision total hip replacement: a follow-up study of five to 16 years.
Te Stroet MA; Bronsema E; Rijnen WH; Gardeniers JW; Schreurs BW
Bone Joint J; 2014 Sep; 96-B(9):1207-13. PubMed ID: 25183592
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Dual Mobility Acetabular Cups in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty in Patients at High Risk for Dislocation.
Harwin SF; Mistry JB; Chughtai M; Khlopas A; Gwam C; Newman JM; Higuera CA; Bonutti PM; Malkani AL; Kolisek FR; Delanois RE; Mont MA
Surg Technol Int; 2017 Jul; 30():251-258. PubMed ID: 28395391
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Acetabular revision arthroplasty using press-fitted jumbo cups: an average 10-year follow-up study.
Moon JK; Ryu J; Kim Y; Yang JH; Hwang KT; Kim YH
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg; 2019 Aug; 139(8):1149-1160. PubMed ID: 31187257
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Minimum ten-year follow-up of cemented total hip replacement in patients with osteonecrosis of the femoral head.
Fyda TM; Callaghan JJ; Olejniczak J; Johnston RC
Iowa Orthop J; 2002; 22():8-19. PubMed ID: 12180617
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Use of porous tantalum components in Paprosky two and three acetabular revision. A minimum five-year follow-up of fifty one hips.
Flecher X; Appy B; Parratte S; Ollivier M; Argenson JN
Int Orthop; 2017 May; 41(5):911-916. PubMed ID: 27766385
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Re-revision of failed revision Total Hip Arthroplasty acetabular components.
Lim SJ; Lee YS; Lim BH; Park YS
Acta Orthop Belg; 2014 Sep; 80(3):357-64. PubMed ID: 26280609
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
