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 *

116 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33088242)

  • 41. The augment-and-modular-cage revision system for reconstruction of severe acetabular defects-two-year clinical and radiographic results.
    Roessler PP; Jaenisch M; Kuhlmann M; Wacker M; Johannes Wagenhäuser P; Gravius S; Wirtz DC
    Int Orthop; 2019 Oct; 43(10):2269-2278. PubMed ID: 30539219
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. A new classification system for the adult dysplastic hip requiring total hip arthroplasty: a reliability study.
    Gaston MS; Gaston P; Donaldson P; Howie CR
    Hip Int; 2009; 19(2):96-101. PubMed ID: 19462364
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Acetabular revision after failed total hip arthroplasty in patients with congenital hip dislocation and dysplasia. Results after a mean of 8.6 years.
    Dearborn JT; Harris WH
    J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2000 Aug; 82(8):1146-53. PubMed ID: 10954105
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Total hip arthroplasty with use of an acetabular reinforcement ring in patients who have congenital dysplasia of the hip. Results at five to fifteen years.
    Gill TJ; Sledge JB; Müller ME
    J Bone Joint Surg Am; 1998 Jul; 80(7):969-79. PubMed ID: 9698001
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Management of Acetabular Bone Loss in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty.
    Melnic CM; Paprosky WG; Sheth NP
    Instr Course Lect; 2018 Feb; 67():207-214. PubMed ID: 31411412
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Mid-term results after revision total hip arthroplasty with custom-made acetabular implants in patients with Paprosky III acetabular bone loss.
    Fröschen FS; Randau TM; Hischebeth GTR; Gravius N; Gravius S; Walter SG
    Arch Orthop Trauma Surg; 2020 Feb; 140(2):263-273. PubMed ID: 31820093
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Cement augmentation in the proximal femur to prevent stem subsidence in revision hip arthroplasty with Paprosky type II/IIIa defects.
    Tsai SW; Chen CF; Wu PK; Chen CM; Chen WM
    J Chin Med Assoc; 2018 Jun; 81(6):571-576. PubMed ID: 29428321
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. [Utility of a structured bone allograft for acetabular defects in the setting of a revision prosthesis].
    García-Anaya LE; Negrete-Corona J; Jiminéz-Aquino JM
    Acta Ortop Mex; 2014; 28(4):212-7. PubMed ID: 26021100
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. [Early primary total hip arthroplasty for acetabular fractures in elderly patients].
    Simko P; Braunsteiner T; Vajcziková S
    Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech; 2006 Aug; 73(4):275-82. PubMed ID: 17026887
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Metal-on-Metal Total Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty: An Evidence-Based Analysis.
    Medical Advisory Secretariat
    Ont Health Technol Assess Ser; 2006; 6(4):1-57. PubMed ID: 23074495
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. High placement of an acetabular component inserted without cement in a revision total hip arthroplasty. Results after a mean of ten years.
    Dearborn JT; Harris WH
    J Bone Joint Surg Am; 1999 Apr; 81(4):469-80. PubMed ID: 10225792
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Single-stage Acetabular Revision During Two-stage THA Revision for Infection is Effective in Selected Patients.
    Fink B; Schlumberger M; Oremek D
    Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2017 Aug; 475(8):2063-2070. PubMed ID: 28353049
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Validity and reliability of the Unified Classification System applied to periprosthetic femur fractures: a comparison with the Vancouver system.
    De Meo D; Zucchi B; Castagna V; Pieracci EM; Mangone M; Calistri A; Persiani P; Villani C
    Curr Med Res Opin; 2020 Aug; 36(8):1375-1381. PubMed ID: 32468914
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Classifying Bone Loss in Failed Stemmed Total Knee Arthroplasty: Determining Reliability.
    Scuderi GR; Weinberg ME; Dennis DA; Peters CL; Taunton MJ; Mont MA
    J Arthroplasty; 2023 Jun; 38(6S):S266-S270. PubMed ID: 36736932
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. [Revision total hip arthroplasty: analysis of the predictive value of a radiographic classification system for assessment of bone stock loss].
    Käfer W; Kinkel S; Puhl W; Kessler S
    Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb; 2003; 141(6):672-7. PubMed ID: 14679433
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Acetabular reconstruction in revision total hip arthroplasty.
    Fryhofer GW; Ramesh S; Sheth NP
    J Clin Orthop Trauma; 2020; 11(1):22-28. PubMed ID: 32001979
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Total hip arthroplasty after operative treatment of an acetabular fracture.
    Weber M; Berry DJ; Harmsen WS
    J Bone Joint Surg Am; 1998 Sep; 80(9):1295-305. PubMed ID: 9759814
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Short-term results of a custom triflange acetabular component for massive acetabular bone loss in revision THA.
    Wind MA; Swank ML; Sorger JI
    Orthopedics; 2013 Mar; 36(3):e260-5. PubMed ID: 23464943
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. [Extra-large uncemented acetabular components for hip revision].
    Huang Z; Zhang W; Lin J; Li W; Bai G; Shen R
    Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi; 2013 Nov; 27(11):1313-7. PubMed ID: 24501889
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Pelvic discontinuity in acetabular revisions: does CT scan overestimate it? A comparative study of diagnostic accuracy of 3D-modeling and traditional 3D CT scan.
    Aprato A; Olivero M; Iannizzi G; Bistolfi A; Sabatini L; Masse A
    Musculoskelet Surg; 2020 Aug; 104(2):171-177. PubMed ID: 31090014
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.