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 *

153 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31210975)

  • 1. Orthopaedic registries - the UK view (National Joint Registry): impact on practice.
    Porter M; Armstrong R; Howard P; Porteous M; Wilkinson JM
    EFORT Open Rev; 2019 Jun; 4(6):377-390. PubMed ID: 31210975
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Validation of revision data for total hip and knee replacements undertaken at a high volume orthopaedic centre against data held on the National Joint Registry.
    Afzal I; Radha S; Smoljanović T; Stafford GH; Twyman R; Field RE
    J Orthop Surg Res; 2019 Oct; 14(1):318. PubMed ID: 31601231
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Implementing large-scale data quality validation in a national arthroplasty registry to improve compliance : the National Joint Registry data quality audit programme.
    Boulton C; Harrison C; Wilton T; Armstrong R; Young E; Pegg D; Wilkinson JM
    Bone Jt Open; 2022 Sep; 3(9):716-725. PubMed ID: 36106695
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Validation of primary metal-on-metal hip arthroplasties on the National Joint Registry for England, Wales and Northern Ireland using data from the London Implant Retrieval Centre: a study using the NJR dataset.
    Sabah SA; Henckel J; Cook E; Whittaker R; Hothi H; Pappas Y; Blunn G; Skinner JA; Hart AJ
    Bone Joint J; 2015 Jan; 97-B(1):10-8. PubMed ID: 25568407
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Orthopaedic registries: the Australian experience.
    de Steiger RN; Graves SE
    EFORT Open Rev; 2019 Jun; 4(6):409-415. PubMed ID: 31210977
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Are all metal-on-metal hip revision operations contributing to the National Joint Registry implant survival curves? : a study comparing the London Implant Retrieval Centre and National Joint Registry datasets.
    Sabah SA; Henckel J; Koutsouris S; Rajani R; Hothi H; Skinner JA; Hart AJ
    Bone Joint J; 2016 Jan; 98-B(1):33-9. PubMed ID: 26733513
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A Comparison of the Surgical Practice of Potential Revision Outlier Joint Replacement Surgeons With Non-outliers: A Case Control Study From the National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man.
    Penfold CM; Whitehouse MR; Sayers A; Wilkinson JM; Hunt L; Ben-Shlomo Y; Judge A; Blom AW
    J Arthroplasty; 2021 Apr; 36(4):1239-1245.e6. PubMed ID: 33160808
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Risk-adjusted cUSUM control charts for shared frailty survival models with application to hip replacement outcomes: a study using the NJR dataset.
    Begun A; Kulinskaya E; MacGregor AJ
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2019 Nov; 19(1):217. PubMed ID: 31775636
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Is American Joint Replacement Registry Data Consistent With International Survivorship in Hip and Knee Arthroplasty? A Comparative Analysis.
    Springer BD; Mullen KP; Donnelly PC; Tucker K; Caton E; Huddleston JI
    J Arthroplasty; 2024 Sep; 39(9S1):S46-S50. PubMed ID: 38417557
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Comparing contemporary revision burden among hip and knee joint replacement registries.
    McGrory BJ; Etkin CD; Lewallen DG
    Arthroplast Today; 2016 Jun; 2(2):83-86. PubMed ID: 28326404
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. What Can We Learn From Surgeons Who Perform THA and TKA and Have the Lowest Revision Rates? A Study from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry.
    Hoskins W; Rainbird S; Lorimer M; Graves SE; Bingham R
    Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2022 Mar; 480(3):464-481. PubMed ID: 34677162
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Do joint registries report true rates of hip dislocation?
    Devane PA; Wraighte PJ; Ong DC; Horne JG
    Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2012 Nov; 470(11):3003-6. PubMed ID: 22451337
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Quality measures for total ankle replacement, 30-day readmission and reoperation rates within 1 year of surgery: a data linkage study using the NJR data set.
    Zaidi R; Macgregor AJ; Goldberg A
    BMJ Open; 2016 May; 6(5):e011332. PubMed ID: 27217286
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The effect of cemented acetabular component geometry on the risk of revision for instability or loosening : a study of 224,874 primary hip arthroplasties from the National Joint Registry.
    Divecha HM; O'Neill TW; Lunt M; Board TN
    Bone Joint J; 2021 Nov; 103-B(11):1669-1677. PubMed ID: 34719277
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The influence of cemented femoral stem choice on the incidence of revision for periprosthetic fracture after primary total hip arthroplasty: an analysis of national joint registry data.
    Palan J; Smith MC; Gregg P; Mellon S; Kulkarni A; Tucker K; Blom AW; Murray DW; Pandit H
    Bone Joint J; 2016 Oct; 98-B(10):1347-1354. PubMed ID: 27694588
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Understanding the uptake of new hip replacement implants in the UK: a cohort study using data from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales.
    Penfold CM; Blom AW; Sayers A; Wilkinson JM; Hunt L; Judge A; Whitehouse MR
    BMJ Open; 2019 Nov; 9(11):e029572. PubMed ID: 31772087
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Outcomes After Metal-on-metal Hip Revision Surgery Depend on the Reason for Failure: A Propensity Score-matched Study.
    Matharu GS; Judge A; Murray DW; Pandit HG
    Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2018 Feb; 476(2):245-258. PubMed ID: 29529653
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Summary of knee implant one, three, five, and 10-year revision risk reported by national and regional arthroplasty registries: a valuable source of evidence for clinical decision-making.
    Foster C; Posada C; Pack B; Hallstrom BR; Hughes RE
    EFORT Open Rev; 2020 May; 5(5):268-272. PubMed ID: 32509331
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Has Metal-On-Metal Resurfacing Been a Cost-Effective Intervention for Health Care Providers?-A Registry Based Study.
    Pulikottil-Jacob R; Connock M; Kandala NB; Mistry H; Grove A; Freeman K; Costa M; Sutcliffe P; Clarke A
    PLoS One; 2016; 11(11):e0165021. PubMed ID: 27802289
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.