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 *

97 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7083681)

  • 1. Prosthetic hip range of motion and impingement. The effects of head and neck geometry.
    Chandler DR; Glousman R; Hull D; McGuire PJ; Kim IS; Clarke IC; Sarmiento A
    Clin Orthop Relat Res; 1982 Jun; (166):284-91. PubMed ID: 7083681
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Bony impingement affects range of motion after total hip arthroplasty: A subject-specific approach.
    Kessler O; Patil S; Wirth S; Mayr E; Colwell CW; D'Lima DD
    J Orthop Res; 2008 Apr; 26(4):443-52. PubMed ID: 18050356
    [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. Impingement after total hip arthroplasty related to prosthetic component selection and range of motion.
    Gondi G; Roberson JR; Ganey TM; Shahriari A; Hutton WC
    J South Orthop Assoc; 1997; 6(4):266-72. PubMed ID: 9434247
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Influence of femoral head size on impingement, dislocation and stress distribution in total hip replacement.
    Kluess D; Martin H; Mittelmeier W; Schmitz KP; Bader R
    Med Eng Phys; 2007 May; 29(4):465-71. PubMed ID: 16901743
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The safe-zones for combined cup and neck anteversions that fulfill the essential range of motion and their optimum combination in total hip replacements.
    Yoshimine F
    J Biomech; 2006; 39(7):1315-23. PubMed ID: 15894324
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Effects of the femoral offset and the head size on the safe range of motion in total hip arthroplasty.
    Matsushita A; Nakashima Y; Jingushi S; Yamamoto T; Kuraoka A; Iwamoto Y
    J Arthroplasty; 2009 Jun; 24(4):646-51. PubMed ID: 18534445
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The effect of femoral component head size on posterior dislocation of the artificial hip joint.
    Bartz RL; Nobel PC; Kadakia NR; Tullos HS
    J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2000 Sep; 82(9):1300-7. PubMed ID: 11005521
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Analysis of optimal range of socket orientations in total hip arthroplasty with use of computer-aided design simulation.
    Seki M; Yuasa N; Ohkuni K
    J Orthop Res; 1998 Jul; 16(4):513-7. PubMed ID: 9747795
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Factors affecting hip range of motion in surface replacement arthroplasty.
    Vendittoli PA; Ganapathi M; Nuño N; Plamondon D; Lavigne M
    Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2007 Nov; 22(9):1004-12. PubMed ID: 17870221
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The impact of the CCD-angle on range of motion and cup positioning in total hip arthroplasty.
    Widmer KH; Majewski M
    Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2005 Aug; 20(7):723-8. PubMed ID: 15964112
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The influence of the oscillation angle and the neck anteversion of the prosthesis on the cup safe-zone that fulfills the criteria for range of motion in total hip replacements. The required oscillation angle for an acceptable cup safe-zone.
    Yoshimine F
    J Biomech; 2005 Jan; 38(1):125-32. PubMed ID: 15519347
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The evolution of the Buck-32 total hip prosthesis.
    Mallory TH
    Clin Orthop Relat Res; 1980; (147):148-53. PubMed ID: 7371282
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Superior displacement of the hip in total joint replacement: effects of prosthetic neck length, neck-stem angle, and anteversion angle on the moment-generating capacity of the muscles.
    Delp SL; Komattu AV; Wixson RL
    J Orthop Res; 1994 Nov; 12(6):860-70. PubMed ID: 7983561
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. Unconstrained tripolar hip implants: effect on hip stability.
    Guyen O; Chen QS; Bejui-Hugues J; Berry DJ; An KN
    Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2007 Feb; 455():202-8. PubMed ID: 17279045
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Influence of total hip design on dislocation: a computer model and clinical analysis.
    Padgett DE; Lipman J; Robie B; Nestor BJ
    Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2006 Jun; 447():48-52. PubMed ID: 16741474
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Femoral anteversion and restricted range of motion in total hip prostheses.
    Herrlin K; Pettersson H; Selvik G; Lidgren L
    Acta Radiol; 1988; 29(5):551-3. PubMed ID: 3166875
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Range of motion in a modular femoral stem system with a variety of neck options.
    Hariri S; Chun S; Cowan JB; Bragdon C; Malchau H; Rubash HE
    J Arthroplasty; 2013 Oct; 28(9):1625-33. PubMed ID: 23886407
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Range of motion caused by design of the total hip prosthesis.
    Herrlin K; Selvik G; Pettersson H; Lidgren L
    Acta Radiol; 1988; 29(6):701-4. PubMed ID: 3190946
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.