177 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35026659)
1. Evaluation of optimal implant alignment in total hip arthroplasty based on postoperative range of motion simulation.
Harada S; Hamai S; Motomura G; Ikemura S; Fujii M; Kawahara S; Sato T; Hara D; Nakashima Y
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2022 Feb; 92():105555. PubMed ID: 35026659
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Computer simulation based on in vivo kinematics of a replaced hip during chair-rising for elucidating target cup and stem positioning with a safety range of hip rotation.
Shiomoto K; Hamai S; Ikebe S; Higaki H; Hara D; Gondo H; Komiyama K; Yoshimoto K; Harada S; Nakashima Y
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2022 Jan; 91():105537. PubMed ID: 34847472
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Cup safe zone and optimal stem anteversion in total hip arthroplasty for patients with highly required range of motion.
Habe Y; Hamada H; Uemura K; Takashima K; Ando W; Sugano N
J Orthop Res; 2024 Jun; 42(6):1283-1291. PubMed ID: 38084832
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Theoretically optimum position of the prosthesis in total hip arthroplasty to fulfill the severe range of motion criteria due to neck impingement.
Hisatome T; Doi H
J Orthop Sci; 2011 Mar; 16(2):229-37. PubMed ID: 21359509
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The Impingement-free, Prosthesis-specific, and Anatomy-adjusted Combined Target Zone for Component Positioning in THA Depends on Design and Implantation Parameters of both Components.
Widmer KH
Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2020 Aug; 478(8):1904-1918. PubMed ID: 32732575
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Differences in range of motion with the same combined anteversion after total hip arthroplasty.
Ohmori T; Kabata T; Kajino Y; Taga T; Hasegawa K; Inoue D; Yamamoto T; Takagi T; Yoshitani J; Ueno T; Tsuchiya H
Int Orthop; 2018 May; 42(5):1021-1028. PubMed ID: 28990125
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Does accelerometer-based portable navigation provide more accurate and precise cup orientation without prosthetic impingement than conventional total hip arthroplasty? A randomized controlled study.
Kiyohara M; Hamai S; Shiomoto K; Harada S; Harada T; Motomura G; Ikemura S; Fujii M; Kawahara S; Nakashima Y
Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg; 2022 Jun; 17(6):1007-1015. PubMed ID: 35347564
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The optimal combined anteversion pattern to achieve a favorable impingement-free angle in total hip arthroplasty.
Ohmori T; Kabata T; Kajino Y; Inoue D; Taga T; Yamamoto T; Takagi T; Yoshitani J; Ueno T; Ueoka K; Tsuchiya H
J Orthop Sci; 2019 May; 24(3):474-481. PubMed ID: 30554937
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The effect of range of motion simulated with a patient-specific three-dimensional simulation analysis on dislocation after total hip arthroplasty.
Mitsutake R; Tanino H; Ito H
Hip Int; 2023 Mar; 33(2):313-322. PubMed ID: 34538126
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The Safe Zone Range for Cup Anteversion Is Narrower Than for Inclination in THA.
Murphy WS; Yun HH; Hayden B; Kowal JH; Murphy SB
Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2018 Feb; 476(2):325-335. PubMed ID: 29529664
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [Femur first in hip arthroplasty--the concept of combined anteversion].
Sendtner E; Müller M; Winkler R; Wörner M; Grifka J; Renkawitz T
Z Orthop Unfall; 2010 Mar; 148(2):185-90. PubMed ID: 20376760
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Compliant positioning of total hip components for optimal range of motion.
Widmer KH; Zurfluh B
J Orthop Res; 2004 Jul; 22(4):815-21. PubMed ID: 15183439
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Even the Intraoperative Knowledge of Femoral Stem Anteversion Cannot Prevent Impingement in Total Hip Arthroplasty.
Weber M; Woerner ML; Sendtner E; Völlner F; Grifka J; Renkawitz TF
J Arthroplasty; 2016 Nov; 31(11):2514-2519. PubMed ID: 27236745
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Small Random Angular Variations in Pelvic Tilt and Lower Extremity Can Cause Error in Static Image-based Preoperative Hip Arthroplasty Planning: A Computer Modeling Study.
Eslam Pour A; Lazennec JY; Patel KP; Anjaria MP; Beaulé PE; Schwarzkopf R
Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2022 Apr; 480(4):818-828. PubMed ID: 35014975
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Three-Dimensional Functional Impingement in Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Biomechanical Analysis.
Debbi EM; Quevedo González FJ; Jerabek SA; Wright TM; Vigdorchik JM
J Arthroplasty; 2022 Jul; 37(7S):S678-S684. PubMed ID: 35271980
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. [Impingement Free Motion in Total Hip Arthroplasty - How Can We Implement It?].
Widmer KH
Z Orthop Unfall; 2016 Aug; 154(4):392-7. PubMed ID: 27336842
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. In vivo kinematic analysis of replaced hip during stationary cycling and computer simulation of optimal cup positioning against prosthetic impingement.
Komiyama K; Hamai S; Ikebe S; Yoshimoto K; Higaki H; Shiomoto K; Gondo H; Hara D; Wang Y; Nakashima Y
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2019 Aug; 68():175-181. PubMed ID: 31229697
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Influence of femoral bowing on range of motion after total hip arthroplasty.
Akiyama K; Shibuya T
Int Orthop; 2018 Aug; 42(8):1795-1802. PubMed ID: 29275431
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Isolated acetabular revision with femoral stem retention using computed tomography-based navigation.
Kubota Y; Kaku N; Tagomori H; Kataoka M; Tsumura H
Orthop Traumatol Surg Res; 2019 Nov; 105(7):1311-1317. PubMed ID: 31522901
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Elucidation of target implant orientations with the safety range of hip rotation with adduction or abduction during squatting: Simulation based on
Harada S; Hamai S; Ikebe S; Hara D; Higaki H; Gondo H; Kawahara S; Shiomoto K; Harada T; Nakashima Y
Front Bioeng Biotechnol; 2022; 10():1023721. PubMed ID: 36466333
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
