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.
65 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3782220)
1. Conventional versus resurfacing total hip arthroplasty. A long-term prospective study of concomitant bilateral implantation of prostheses. Amstutz HC J Bone Joint Surg Am; 1986 Dec; 68(9):1464. PubMed ID: 3782220 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Results and lessons learned from a United States hip resurfacing investigational device exemption trial. Stulberg BN; Trier KK; Naughton M; Zadzilka JD J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2008 Aug; 90 Suppl 3():21-6. PubMed ID: 18676932 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Limited range of motion of hip resurfacing arthroplasty due to unfavorable ratio of prosthetic head size and femoral neck diameter. Kluess D; Zietz C; Lindner T; Mittelmeier W; Schmitz KP; Bader R Acta Orthop; 2008 Dec; 79(6):748-54. PubMed ID: 19085490 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Less range of motion with resurfacing arthroplasty than with total hip arthroplasty: in vitro examination of 8 designs. Bengs BC; Sangiorgio SN; Ebramzadeh E Acta Orthop; 2008 Dec; 79(6):755-62. PubMed ID: 19085491 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Three metal-on-metal hip replacement devices from the same manufacturer--a short- to mid-term survival. Kostensalo I; Junnila M; Mokka J; Virolainen P; Vahlberg T; Mäkelä KT Acta Orthop Belg; 2014 Jun; 80(2):222-7. PubMed ID: 25090796 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. [Choice of hip prosthesis in patients younger than 50 years]. Schreurs BW; Busch VJ; Veth RP Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2007 Sep; 151(35):1918-22. PubMed ID: 17907541 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Hip resurfacing arthroplasty versus large-diameter head metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty: comparison of three designs from the Finnish Arthroplasty Register. Junnila M; Kostensalo I; Virolainen P; Remes V; Matilainen M; Vahlberg T; Pulkkinen P; Eskelinen A; Itälä A; Mäkelä K Scand J Surg; 2014 Mar; 103(1):54-9. PubMed ID: 24345980 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Failure mechanisms of total hip resurfacing: implications for the present. Ritter MA; Lutgring JD; Berend ME; Pierson JL Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2006 Dec; 453():110-4. PubMed ID: 17006372 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The early results of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing - a prospective study at a minimum two-year follow-up. Bergeron SG; Desy NM; Nikolaou VS; Debiparshad K; Antoniou J Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis; 2009; 67(2):132-4. PubMed ID: 19583540 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Long-term follow-up of the Indiana conservative resurfacing hip arthroplasty. Faris PM; Ritter MA; Bicknell R; Keating EM Semin Arthroplasty; 1990 Jul; 1(1):12-5. PubMed ID: 10149552 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Periacetabular bone mineral density changes after resurfacing hip arthroplasty versus conventional total hip arthroplasty. A randomized controlled DEXA study. Smolders JM; Pakvis DF; Hendrickx BW; Verdonschot N; van Susante JL J Arthroplasty; 2013 Aug; 28(7):1177-84. PubMed ID: 23219623 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A comparison of total hip resurfacing and total hip arthroplasty - patients and outcomes. Fowble VA; dela Rosa MA; Schmalzried TP Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis; 2009; 67(2):108-12. PubMed ID: 19583535 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The effect of component size and orientation on the concentrations of metal ions after resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip. Langton DJ; Jameson SS; Joyce TJ; Webb J; Nargol AV J Bone Joint Surg Br; 2008 Sep; 90(9):1143-51. PubMed ID: 18757952 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The results of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing in patients under 30 years of age. Woon RP; Johnson AJ; Amstutz HC J Arthroplasty; 2013 Jun; 28(6):1010-4. PubMed ID: 23433997 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. [Dislocation of hip resurfacing endoprosthesis--a case report]. Kotela A; Pirko K; Deszczyński MJ; Kotela I Przegl Lek; 2010; 67(5):435-7. PubMed ID: 20684355 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Metal ion levels in the blood of patients after hip resurfacing: a comparison between twenty-eight and thirty-six-millimeter-head metal-on-metal prostheses. Antoniou J; Zukor DJ; Mwale F; Minarik W; Petit A; Huk OL J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2008 Aug; 90 Suppl 3():142-8. PubMed ID: 18676949 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Wagner resurfacing hip arthroplasty. The results of one hundred consecutive arthroplasties after eight to ten years. Howie DW; Campbell D; McGee M; Cornish BL J Bone Joint Surg Am; 1990 Jun; 72(5):708-14. PubMed ID: 2355032 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Hip resurfacing arthroplasty: risk factors for failure over 25 years. Yue EJ; Cabanela ME; Duffy GP; Heckman MG; O'Connor MI Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2009 Apr; 467(4):992-9. PubMed ID: 18813892 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Two-year serum metal ion levels in minimally invasive total conservative hip resurfacing: preliminary results of a prospective study. Tai SM; Millard N; Munir S; Jenabzadeh AR; Walter LR; Walter WL ANZ J Surg; 2015 Mar; 85(3):164-8. PubMed ID: 25288230 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The evolution of hip resurfacing arthroplasty. Grigoris P; Roberts P; Panousis K; Bosch H Orthop Clin North Am; 2005 Apr; 36(2):125-34, vii. PubMed ID: 15833450 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]