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.
138 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25090796)
21. 10-year results of the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing: a non-designer case series. Hunter TJA; Moores TS; Morley D; Manoharan G; Collier SG; Shaylor PJ Hip Int; 2018 Jan; 28(1):50-52. PubMed ID: 28885647 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Large diameter head metal-on-metal bearings total hip arthroplasty: preliminary results. Mertl P; Boughebri O; Havet E; Triclot P; Lardanchet JF; Gabrion A Orthop Traumatol Surg Res; 2010 Feb; 96(1):14-20. PubMed ID: 20170852 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. The influence of the size of the component on the outcome of resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip: a review of the literature. Shimmin AJ; Walter WL; Esposito C J Bone Joint Surg Br; 2010 Apr; 92(4):469-76. PubMed ID: 20357319 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Five- to ten-year outcomes for modular metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty. Bernasek TL; Polikandriotis JA; Levering MF; Dalury DF; Fisher DA; Adler MJ J Arthroplasty; 2013 Aug; 28(7):1231-4. PubMed ID: 23643031 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Factors affecting squeaking in metal on metal hip resurfacings. Imbuldeniya A; Munir S; Chow J; Walter WL; Zicat BA; Walter WK Hip Int; 2014; 24(4):340-6. PubMed ID: 24817393 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. High failure rate of the R3 metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty. Dramis A; Clatworthy E; Jones SA; John A Hip Int; 2014; 24(5):442-7. PubMed ID: 25096456 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Editor's Spotlight/Take 5: Poor Survivorship and Frequent Complications at a Median of 10 Years After Metal-on-Metal Hip Resurfacing Revision. Leopold SS Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2017 Feb; 475(2):300-303. PubMed ID: 27844400 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
28. Poor short term outcome with a metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty. Levy YD; Ezzet KA J Arthroplasty; 2013 Aug; 28(7):1212-7. PubMed ID: 23538122 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Long-term blood metal ion levels and clinical outcome after Birmingham hip arthroplasty. Pietiläinen S; Lindström M; Laaksonen I; Venäläinen MS; Lankinen P; Mäkelä KT Scand J Surg; 2022; 111(1):14574969211066197. PubMed ID: 35168442 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Recall of the ASR XL Head and Hip Resurfacing Systems. Maurer-Ertl W; Friesenbichler J; Holzer LA; Leitner L; Ogris K; Maier M; Leithner A Orthopedics; 2017 Mar; 40(2):e340-e347. PubMed ID: 27992643 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. One-component revision of failed hip resurfacing from adverse reaction to metal wear debris. Pritchett JW J Arthroplasty; 2014 Jan; 29(1):219-24. PubMed ID: 23680501 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Chinese experience with metal-on-metal hip resurfacing. Win HL; Yang S; Wimalaratne HK; Weihua X; Shunan Y; Ze R J Arthroplasty; 2012 Jun; 27(6):968-75. PubMed ID: 22333868 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. A five-year radiostereometric follow-up of the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing arthroplasty. Itayem R; Arndt A; McMinn DJ; Daniel J; Lundberg A J Bone Joint Surg Br; 2007 Sep; 89(9):1140-3. PubMed ID: 17905947 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Hip resurfacing arthroplasty: risk factors for failure over 25 years. Yue EJ; Cabanela ME; Duffy GP; Heckman MG; O'Connor MI Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2009 Apr; 467(4):992-9. PubMed ID: 18813892 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Metal ion levels in total hip arthroplasty versus hip resurfacing. Johnson AJ; Le Duff MJ; Yoon JP; Al-Hamad M; Amstutz HC J Arthroplasty; 2013 Aug; 28(7):1235-7. PubMed ID: 23618754 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Catastrophic failure due to massive osteolysis of both acetabular and femoral components in a metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty: a demonstrative case report. Gutman G; Hershkovich O; Amit Y; Israeli A Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol; 2013 Nov; 23 Suppl 2():S225-8. PubMed ID: 23412220 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Current concepts in hip arthroplasty imaging: metal-on-metal prostheses, their complications, and imaging strategies. Bestic JM; Berquist TH Semin Roentgenol; 2013 Apr; 48(2):178-86. PubMed ID: 23452465 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
38. Metal-on-Metal Testing to Salvage a Device Disaster: Commentary on an article by Gulraj S. Matharu, BSc(Hons), MBChB, MRCS, MRes, et al.: "The Effectiveness of Blood Metal Ions in Identifying Patients with Unilateral Birmingham Hip Resurfacing and Corail-Pinnacle Metal-on-Metal Hip Implants at Risk of Adverse Reactions to Metal Debris". Dorr LD J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2016 Apr; 98(8):e31. PubMed ID: 27098331 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
39. Does a prior hip arthroscopy affect clinical outcomes in metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty? Nam D; Maher P; Nath T; Su EP Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ); 2014 Nov; 43(11):E255-60. PubMed ID: 25379753 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Early failure of a Birmingham resurfacing hip replacement with lymphoreticular spread of metal debris: pre-operative diagnosis with MR. Toms AP; Nolan J; Barker T; Darrah C; Malcolm P Br J Radiol; 2009 May; 82(977):e87-91. PubMed ID: 19386954 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]