134 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33330245)
1. Comparative study of glenoid version and inclination using two-dimensional images from computed tomography and three-dimensional reconstructed bone models.
Choi CH; Kim HC; Kang D; Kim JY
Clin Shoulder Elb; 2020 Sep; 23(3):119-124. PubMed ID: 33330245
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The influence of three-dimensional planning on decision-making in total shoulder arthroplasty.
Werner BS; Hudek R; Burkhart KJ; Gohlke F
J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2017 Aug; 26(8):1477-1483. PubMed ID: 28162884
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Difference in glenoid retroversion between two-dimensional axial computed tomography and three-dimensional reconstructed images.
Kim H; Yoo CH; Park SB; Song HS
Clin Shoulder Elb; 2020 Jun; 23(2):71-79. PubMed ID: 33330237
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Automated Three-Dimensional Measurement of Glenoid Version and Inclination in Arthritic Shoulders.
Boileau P; Cheval D; Gauci MO; Holzer N; Chaoui J; Walch G
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2018 Jan; 100(1):57-65. PubMed ID: 29298261
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparison of standard two-dimensional and three-dimensional corrected glenoid version measurements.
Budge MD; Lewis GS; Schaefer E; Coquia S; Flemming DJ; Armstrong AD
J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2011 Jun; 20(4):577-83. PubMed ID: 21324716
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Variability and reliability of 2-dimensional vs. 3-dimensional glenoid version measurements with 3-dimensional preoperative planning software.
Reid JJ; Kunkle BF; Greene AT; Eichinger JK; Friedman RJ
J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2022 Feb; 31(2):302-309. PubMed ID: 34411724
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Reliability of measurements performed on two dimensional and three dimensional computed tomography in glenoid assessment for instability.
Kubicka AM; Stefaniak J; Lubiatowski P; Długosz J; Dzianach M; Redman M; Piontek J; Romanowski L
Int Orthop; 2016 Dec; 40(12):2581-2588. PubMed ID: 27492723
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Analysis of acetabular orientation and femoral anteversion using images of three-dimensional reconstructed bone models.
Park J; Kim JY; Kim HD; Kim YC; Seo A; Je M; Mun JU; Kim B; Park IH; Kim SY
Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg; 2017 May; 12(5):855-864. PubMed ID: 28063078
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Insufficient consensus regarding circle size and bone loss width using the ratio-"best fit circle"-method even with three-dimensional computed tomography.
Lacheta L; Herbst E; Voss A; Braun S; Jungmann P; Millett PJ; Imhoff A; Martetschläger F
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc; 2019 Oct; 27(10):3222-3229. PubMed ID: 30725122
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Reliability of a novel 3-dimensional computed tomography method for reverse shoulder arthroplasty postoperative evaluation.
Venne G; Pickell M; Ellis RE; Bicknell RT
JSES Open Access; 2019 Oct; 3(3):168-173. PubMed ID: 31709357
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Interdepartmental imaging protocol for clinically based three-dimensional computed tomography can provide accurate measurement of glenoid version.
Zale CL; Pace GI; Lewis GS; Chan J; Kim HM
J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2018 Jul; 27(7):1297-1305. PubMed ID: 29331571
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Influence of Radiographic Viewing Perspective on Glenoid Inclination Measurement.
Chalmers PN; Suter T; Jacxsens M; Zhang Y; Zhang C; Tashjian RZ; Henninger HB
J Shoulder Elb Arthroplast; 2019; 3():. PubMed ID: 33437911
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparison of Glenoid Dimensions Between 3D Computed Tomography and 3D Printing.
Yiannakopoulos C; Vlastos I; Koutserimpas C; Gianzina E; Dellis S; Kalinterakis G
Cureus; 2024 Jan; 16(1):e53133. PubMed ID: 38420064
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Commercial 3-dimensional imaging programs are not created equal: version and inclination measurement positions vary among preoperative planning software.
Waltz RA; Peebles AM; Ernat JJ; Eble SK; Denard PJ; Romeo AA; Golijanin P; Liegel SM; Provencher MT
JSES Int; 2022 May; 6(3):413-420. PubMed ID: 35572452
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Pre-operative arthritic glenoid assessment: 3D automated planning software versus manual multiplanar measurements of version and inclination.
Hall T; Wong JRY; Dirckx M; Rajesparan K; Rashid A
J Orthop; 2023 Feb; 36():24-28. PubMed ID: 36582547
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Radiographic characterization of the B2 glenoid: the effect of computed tomographic axis orientation.
Chalmers PN; Salazar D; Chamberlain A; Keener JD
J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2017 Feb; 26(2):258-264. PubMed ID: 27592372
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparison of glenoid inclination angle using different clinical imaging modalities.
Daggett M; Werner B; Gauci MO; Chaoui J; Walch G
J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2016 Feb; 25(2):180-5. PubMed ID: 26356363
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The reverse shoulder arthroplasty angle: a new measurement of glenoid inclination for reverse shoulder arthroplasty.
Boileau P; Gauci MO; Wagner ER; Clowez G; Chaoui J; Chelli M; Walch G
J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2019 Jul; 28(7):1281-1290. PubMed ID: 30935825
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Three-dimensional measures of posterior bone loss and retroversion in Walch B2 glenoids predict the need for an augmented anatomic glenoid component.
Cronin KJ; Kirsch JM; Gates S; Patel MS; Joyce CD; Hill BW; Gutman MJ; Williams GR; Namdari S
J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2021 Oct; 30(10):2386-2392. PubMed ID: 33753274
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Glenoid version: how to measure it? Validity of different methods in two-dimensional computed tomography scans.
Rouleau DM; Kidder JF; Pons-Villanueva J; Dynamidis S; Defranco M; Walch G
J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2010 Dec; 19(8):1230-7. PubMed ID: 20452247
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
