634 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23990446)
1. Comparison of robotic-assisted and conventional acetabular cup placement in THA: a matched-pair controlled study.
Domb BG; El Bitar YF; Sadik AY; Stake CE; Botser IB
Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2014 Jan; 472(1):329-36. PubMed ID: 23990446
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Adoption of Robotic vs Fluoroscopic Guidance in Total Hip Arthroplasty: Is Acetabular Positioning Improved in the Learning Curve?
Kamara E; Robinson J; Bas MA; Rodriguez JA; Hepinstall MS
J Arthroplasty; 2017 Jan; 32(1):125-130. PubMed ID: 27499519
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. What Safe Zone? The Vast Majority of Dislocated THAs Are Within the Lewinnek Safe Zone for Acetabular Component Position.
Abdel MP; von Roth P; Jennings MT; Hanssen AD; Pagnano MW
Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2016 Feb; 474(2):386-91. PubMed ID: 26150264
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The Safe Zone Range for Cup Anteversion Is Narrower Than for Inclination in THA.
Murphy WS; Yun HH; Hayden B; Kowal JH; Murphy SB
Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2018 Feb; 476(2):325-335. PubMed ID: 29529664
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Does fluoroscopy with anterior hip arthroplasty decrease acetabular cup variability compared with a nonguided posterior approach?
Rathod PA; Bhalla S; Deshmukh AJ; Rodriguez JA
Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2014 Jun; 472(6):1877-85. PubMed ID: 24549773
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Acetabular Placement Accuracy With the Direct Anterior Approach Freehand Technique.
Soderquist MC; Scully R; Unger AS
J Arthroplasty; 2017 Sep; 32(9):2748-2754. PubMed ID: 28499624
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Assuring the long-term total joint arthroplasty: a triad of variables.
Kayani B; Konan S; Thakrar RR; Huq SS; Haddad FS
Bone Joint J; 2019 Jan; 101-B(1_Supple_A):11-18. PubMed ID: 30648491
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Intraoperative evaluation of acetabular cup position during anterior approach total hip arthroplasty: are we accurately interpreting?
Delagrammaticas DE; Ochenjele G; Rosenthal BD; Assenmacher B; Manning DW; Stover MD
Hip Int; 2020 Jan; 30(1):40-47. PubMed ID: 31387397
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Does fluoroscopy improve acetabular component placement in total hip arthroplasty?
Beamer BS; Morgan JH; Barr C; Weaver MJ; Vrahas MS
Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2014 Dec; 472(12):3953-62. PubMed ID: 25238804
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Does robotic assisted technology improve the accuracy of acetabular component positioning in patients with DDH?
Zhou Y; Shao H; Huang Y; Deng W; Yang D; Bian T
J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong); 2021; 29(2):23094990211025325. PubMed ID: 34308688
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Acetabular cup placement and offset control in robotic total hip arthroplasty performed through the modified anterolateral approach.
Avram GM; Prill R; Gurau CD; Georgeanu V; Deleanu B; Russu O; Becker R; Predescu V
Int Orthop; 2023 Sep; 47(9):2265-2273. PubMed ID: 37160646
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Does robotic-assisted computer navigation improve acetabular cup positioning in total hip arthroplasty for Crowe III/IV hip dysplasia? A propensity score case-match analysis.
Chai W; Xu C; Guo RW; Kong XP; Fu J; Tang PF; Chen JY
Int Orthop; 2022 Apr; 46(4):769-777. PubMed ID: 34997288
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Is the Acetabular Cup Orientation Different in Robot-Assisted and Conventional Total Hip Arthroplasty With Right-Handed Surgeons Using an Anterolateral Approach?
Kara GK; Turan K; Eroglu ON; Ozturk C; Ertürer E
Cureus; 2023 Jul; 15(7):e42335. PubMed ID: 37614261
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Does a Commercially Available Augmented Reality-based Portable Hip Navigation System Improve Cup Positioning During THA Compared With the Conventional Technique? A Randomized Controlled Study.
Tanino H; Mitsutake R; Takagi K; Ito H
Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2024 Mar; 482(3):458-467. PubMed ID: 37650864
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Redefining the 3D Topography of the Acetabular Safe Zone: A Multivariable Study Evaluating Prosthetic Hip Stability.
Hevesi M; Wyles CC; Rouzrokh P; Erickson BJ; Maradit-Kremers H; Lewallen DG; Taunton MJ; Trousdale RT; Berry DJ
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2022 Feb; 104(3):239-245. PubMed ID: 34958643
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Which one is more affected by navigation-assisted cup positioning in total hip arthroplasty: Anteversion or inclination? A retrospective matched-pair cohort study in Asian physique.
Oh KJ; Kim BK; Jo MI; Ahn BM
J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong); 2018; 26(2):2309499018780755. PubMed ID: 29890935
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. [Comparative study of intra- and post-operative inclination and anteversion angles of acetabular cup in robot-assisted total hip arthroplasty].
Tian R; Lei Y; Wang K; Yang P
Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi; 2021 Oct; 35(10):1246-1250. PubMed ID: 34651476
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Precise acetabular positioning, discrepancy in leg length, and hip offset using a new seven-axis robot-assisted total hip arthroplasty system requires no learning curve: a retrospective study.
Tian R; Duan X; Kong N; Wang K; Yang P
J Orthop Surg Res; 2023 Mar; 18(1):236. PubMed ID: 36964615
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Danish survey of acetabular component positioning practice during primary total hip arthroplasty.
Cotong D; Troelsen A; Husted H; Gromov K
Dan Med J; 2017 Apr; 64(4):. PubMed ID: 28385170
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A Comparison of Component Positioning Between Fluoroscopy-Assisted and Robotic-Assisted Total Hip Arthroplasty.
Stewart NJ; Stewart JL; Brisbin A
J Arthroplasty; 2022 Aug; 37(8):1602-1605.e3. PubMed ID: 35314287
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
