732 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28062151)
1. Comparable Results With Porous Metal Augments in Combination With Either Cemented or Uncemented Cups in Revision Hip Arthroplasty: An Analysis of One Hundred Forty-Seven Revisions at a Mean of Five Years.
Mahmoud AN; Sundberg M; Flivik G
J Arthroplasty; 2017 May; 32(5):1612-1617. PubMed ID: 28062151
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Treatment of Acetabular Defects with Porous Metal Augments in Revision Hip Surgery.
Ciriviri J; Nestorovski Z; Talevski D; Vranishkovski T; Kostov H
Pril (Makedon Akad Nauk Umet Odd Med Nauki); 2019 Oct; 40(2):33-39. PubMed ID: 31605583
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. High proximal migration in cemented acetabular revisions operated with bone impaction grafting; 47 revision cups followed with RSA for 17 years.
Mohaddes M; Herberts P; Malchau H; Johanson PE; Kärrholm J
Hip Int; 2017 May; 27(3):251-258. PubMed ID: 27886360
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. [Influence of the Type of Hip-Component Fixation and Age of Patients on Mid-Term Revision Rate of Total Hip Replacement].
Kubinec V
Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech; 2018; 85(1):46-53. PubMed ID: 30257769
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. What Are the Long-term Results of Cemented Revision THA with Use of Both Acetabular and Femoral Impaction Bone Grafting in Patients Younger Than 55 Years?
Verspeek J; Nijenhuis TA; Kuijpers MFL; Rijnen WHC; Schreurs BW
Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2021 Jan; 479(1):84-91. PubMed ID: 32898047
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. Cementless acetabular revision: past, present, and future. Revision total hip arthroplasty: the acetabular side using cementless implants.
Pulido L; Rachala SR; Cabanela ME
Int Orthop; 2011 Feb; 35(2):289-98. PubMed ID: 21234562
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. A long-term survivorship comparison between cemented and uncemented cups with shelf grafts in revision total hip arthroplasty after dysplasia.
Sternheim A; Abolghasemian M; Safir OA; Backstein D; Gross AE; Kuzyk PR
J Arthroplasty; 2013 Feb; 28(2):303-8. PubMed ID: 22854344
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Short-term survival of the trabecular metal cup is similar to that of standard cups used in acetabular revision surgery.
Mohaddes M; Rolfson O; Kärrholm J
Acta Orthop; 2015 Feb; 86(1):26-31. PubMed ID: 25399966
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Reconstruction of acetabular defects with porous tantalum shells and augments in revision total hip arthroplasty at ten-year follow-up.
Löchel J; Janz V; Hipfl C; Perka C; Wassilew GI
Bone Joint J; 2019 Mar; 101-B(3):311-316. PubMed ID: 30813786
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Long-term clinical outcome of acetabular cup revision surgery: comparison of cemented cups, cementless cups, and cemented cups with reinforcement devices.
Kokubo Y; Oki H; Sugita D; Negoro K; Takeno K; Miyazaki T; Nakajima H
Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol; 2016 May; 26(4):407-13. PubMed ID: 27010392
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Cemented revision of failed uncemented femoral components of total hip arthroplasty.
Davis CM; Berry DJ; Harmsen WS
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2003 Jul; 85(7):1264-9. PubMed ID: 12851351
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Satisfying Results of Primary Hip Arthroplasty in Patients With Hip Dysplasia at a Mean Followup of 20 Years.
Colo E; Rijnen WH; Gardeniers JW; van Kampen A; Schreurs BW
Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2016 Nov; 474(11):2462-2468. PubMed ID: 27492686
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Acetabular reconstruction with impaction bone-grafting and a cemented cup in patients younger than fifty years old.
Schreurs BW; Busch VJ; Welten ML; Verdonschot N; Slooff TJ; Gardeniers JW
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2004 Nov; 86(11):2385-92. PubMed ID: 15523007
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Tritanium Acetabular Cup in Revision Hip Replacement: A Six to Ten Years of Follow-Up Study.
Hosny HAH; El-Bakoury A; Srinivasan SCM; Yarlagadda R; Keenan J
J Arthroplasty; 2018 Aug; 33(8):2566-2570. PubMed ID: 29685709
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Minimum Five-Year Outcomes with Porous Tantalum Acetabular Cup and Augment Construct in Complex Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty.
Jenkins DR; Odland AN; Sierra RJ; Hanssen AD; Lewallen DG
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2017 May; 99(10):e49. PubMed ID: 28509833
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. [Metal-on-metal hip replacement using Metasul cups cemented into Muller reinforcement rings after a mean 5-year (3-8) follow-up: improvement of acetabular fixation by comparing with direct cementation to bone].
Girard J; Herent S; Combes A; Pinoit Y; Soenen M; Laffargue P; Migaud H
Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot; 2008 Jun; 94(4):346-53. PubMed ID: 18555860
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. A cemented cup with acetabular impaction bone grafting is more cost-effective than an uncemented cup in patients under 50 years.
Busch VJ; Verschueren J; Adang EM; Lie SA; Havelin LI; Schreurs BW
Hip Int; 2016; 26(1):43-9. PubMed ID: 26743037
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Total hip arthroplasty revision by dual-mobility acetabular cup cemented in a metal reinforcement: A 62 case series at a minimum 5 years' follow-up.
Lebeau N; Bayle M; Belhaouane R; Chelli M; Havet E; Brunschweiler B; Mertl P
Orthop Traumatol Surg Res; 2017 Sep; 103(5):679-684. PubMed ID: 28578096
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Does the Risk of Rerevision Vary Between Porous Tantalum Cups and Other Cementless Designs After Revision Hip Arthroplasty?
Laaksonen I; Lorimer M; Gromov K; Rolfson O; Mäkelä KT; Graves SE; Malchau H; Mohaddes M
Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2017 Dec; 475(12):3015-3022. PubMed ID: 28646360
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
