142 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36963526)
1. No Difference in Subsidence Between Modern Monoblock and Modular Titanium Fluted Tapered Femoral Stems.
Pomeroy E; Lim JBT; Vasarhelyi EM; Naudie DDR; Lanting B; MacDonald SJ; McCalden RW; Howard JL
J Arthroplasty; 2023 Jul; 38(7S):S223-S228. PubMed ID: 36963526
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Subsidence Following Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty Using Modular and Monolithic Components.
Clair AJ; Gabor JA; Patel KS; Friedlander S; Deshmukh AJ; Schwarzkopf R
J Arthroplasty; 2020 Jun; 35(6S):S299-S303. PubMed ID: 32253066
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Modern Revision Femoral Stem Designs Have No Difference in Rates of Subsidence.
Yacovelli S; Ottaway J; Banerjee S; Courtney PM
J Arthroplasty; 2021 Jan; 36(1):268-273. PubMed ID: 32863074
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Subsidence of monoblock and modular titanium fluted tapered stems in revision hip arthroplasty: A retrospective multicentre comparison study.
Pomeroy E; Flynn SO; Grigoras M; Murphy TP; Stavrakis AI; Rowan FE
J Clin Orthop Trauma; 2022 Nov; 34():102021. PubMed ID: 36147379
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Incidence and Predictors of Subsidence Using Modular, Tapered, Fluted Titanium Femoral Stems in Aseptic Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty.
Baldwin TJ; Deckard ER; Buller LT; Meneghini RM
J Arthroplasty; 2024 May; 39(5):1304-1311. PubMed ID: 37924992
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Bicortical Contact Predicts Subsidence of Modular Tapered Stems in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty.
Moriarty P; Sheridan GA; Wong L; Guerin S; Gul R; Harty JA
J Arthroplasty; 2020 Aug; 35(8):2195-2199. PubMed ID: 32327285
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Nonmodular Tapered Fluted Titanium Stems Osseointegrate Reliably at Short Term in Revision THAs.
Sandiford NA; Garbuz DS; Masri BA; Duncan CP
Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2017 Jan; 475(1):186-192. PubMed ID: 27672012
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Femoral Bone Remodeling in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty with Use of Modular Compared with Monoblock Tapered Fluted Titanium Stems: The Role of Stem Length and Stiffness.
Huang Y; Shao H; Zhou Y; Gu J; Tang H; Yang D
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2019 Mar; 101(6):531-538. PubMed ID: 30893234
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Short-term outcomes with the REDAPT monolithic, tapered, fluted, grit-blasted, forged titanium revision femoral stem.
Gabor JA; Padilla JA; Feng JE; Schnaser E; Lutes WB; Park KJ; Incavo S; Vigdorchik J; Schwarzkopf R
Bone Joint J; 2020 Feb; 102-B(2):191-197. PubMed ID: 32009430
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of a Monoblock Fluted Titanium-Tapered Stem for Paprosky IIIa, IIIb, and IV Femoral Bone Defects.
Passano B; Oakley CT; Lutes WB; Incavo SJ; Park KJ; Schwarzkopf R
J Arthroplasty; 2023 Jul; 38(7):1342-1348. PubMed ID: 36731584
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Efficacy and safety of modular versus monoblock stems in revision total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Wang D; Li H; Zhang W; Li H; Xu C; Liu W; Li J
J Orthop Traumatol; 2023 Sep; 24(1):50. PubMed ID: 37715867
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Is There a Benefit to Modularity for Femoral Revisions When Using a Splined, Tapered Titanium Stem?
Cohn MR; Tetreault MW; Li J; Kunze KN; Nahhas CR; Michalski JF; Levine BR; Nam D
J Arthroplasty; 2020 Jun; 35(6S):S278-S283. PubMed ID: 32067894
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Minimum 2-Year Outcomes of a Modern Monoblock Titanium Fluted Tapered Revision Stem for Complex Primary and Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty.
Alqahtani Y; Somerville LE; Vasarhelyi EM; Howard JL; Lanting BA; Naudie DDR; MacDonald SJ; McCalden RW
J Arthroplasty; 2024 Mar; ():. PubMed ID: 38521249
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Radiographic and Clinical Outcomes of Modular Tapered Fluted Stems for Femoral Revision for Paprosky III and IV Femoral Defects or Vancouver B2 and B3 Femoral Fractures.
Otero JE; Martin JR; Rowe TM; Odum SM; Mason JB
J Arthroplasty; 2020 Apr; 35(4):1069-1073. PubMed ID: 31870582
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. What Is the Difference Between Modular and Nonmodular Tapered Fluted Titanium Stems in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty.
Huang Y; Zhou Y; Shao H; Gu J; Tang H; Tang Q
J Arthroplasty; 2017 Oct; 32(10):3108-3113. PubMed ID: 28602532
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Is There a Benefit to Modularity in 'Simpler' Femoral Revisions?
Huddleston JI; Tetreault MW; Yu M; Bedair H; Hansen VJ; Choi HR; Goodman SB; Sporer SM; Della Valle CJ
Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2016 Feb; 474(2):415-20. PubMed ID: 26245164
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Clinical, functional and radiographic outcomes after revision total hip arthroplasty with tapered fluted modular or non-modular stems: a systematic review.
Koutalos AA; Varitimidis S; Malizos KN; Karachalios T
Hip Int; 2022 Jul; 32(4):475-487. PubMed ID: 33829900
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Risk Factors for Subsidence of Modular Fluted Tapered Stems Used During Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty for Periprosthetic Hip Fractures.
Parry JA; Hernandez NM; Berry DJ; Abdel MP; Yuan BJ
J Arthroplasty; 2018 Sep; 33(9):2967-2970. PubMed ID: 29859724
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Risk factors for subsidence of modular fluted tapered stem implanted by using transfemoral Wagner approach during revision hip arthroplasty.
Bobovec D; Bohaček I; Juras J; Delimar D
Int Orthop; 2020 Sep; 44(9):1685-1691. PubMed ID: 32405886
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Comparison of modular and nonmodular tapered fluted titanium stems in femoral revision hip arthroplasty: a minimum 6-year follow-up study.
Feng S; Zhang Y; Bao YH; Yang Z; Zha GC; Chen XY
Sci Rep; 2020 Aug; 10(1):13692. PubMed ID: 32792539
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
