135 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8027893)
41. Distal femoral fixation: a laboratory comparison of the 95 degrees plate, antegrade and retrograde inserted reamed intramedullary nails.
Koval KJ; Kummer FJ; Bharam S; Chen D; Halder S
J Orthop Trauma; 1996; 10(6):378-82. PubMed ID: 8854314
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
42. Biomechanical analysis comparing titanium elastic nails with locked plating in two simulated pediatric femur fracture models.
Porter SE; Booker GR; Parsell DE; Weber MD; Russell GV; Woodall J; Wagner M; Neubauer T
J Pediatr Orthop; 2012 Sep; 32(6):587-93. PubMed ID: 22892620
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
43. Treatment of humeral shaft fractures with humeral locked nail and comparison with plate fixation.
Lin J
J Trauma; 1998 May; 44(5):859-64. PubMed ID: 9603089
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
44. [Effectiveness comparison between locking compression plate fixation and locked intramedullary nail fixation for humeral shaft fracture of types B and C].
Yin P; Mao Z; Zhang L; Tao S; Zhang Q; Liang X; Zhang H; Long A; Wang G; Tang P
Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi; 2013 Dec; 27(12):1457-61. PubMed ID: 24640365
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
45. Anatomic considerations of locked humeral nailing.
Lin J; Hou SM; Inoue N; Chao EY; Hang YS
Clin Orthop Relat Res; 1999 Nov; (368):247-54. PubMed ID: 10613175
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
46. A comparative biomechanical analysis of implants for the stabilization of proximal humerus fractures.
Füchtmeier B; May R; Fierlbeck J; Hammer J; Nerlich M
Technol Health Care; 2006; 14(4-5):261-70. PubMed ID: 17065749
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
47. Distal femoral fixation: a biomechanical comparison of trigen retrograde intramedullary (i.m.) nail, dynamic condylar screw (DCS), and locking compression plate (LCP) condylar plate.
Heiney JP; Barnett MD; Vrabec GA; Schoenfeld AJ; Baji A; Njus GO
J Trauma; 2009 Feb; 66(2):443-9. PubMed ID: 19204519
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
48. An in vitro biomechanical comparison of an interlocking nail system and dynamic compression plate fixation of ostectomized equine third metacarpal bones.
Lopez MJ; Wilson DG; Vanderby R; Markel MD
Vet Surg; 1999; 28(5):333-40. PubMed ID: 10493637
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
49. A comparison of compressive force generation by plating and intramedullary nailing techniques in a transverse diaphyseal humerus fracture model.
Virkus WV; Goldberg SH; Lorenz EP
J Trauma; 2008 Jul; 65(1):103-8. PubMed ID: 18580515
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
50. [Biomechanical comparative study of three types of osteosynthesis in the treatment of supra and intercondylar fractures of the humerus in adults].
Fornasiéri C; Staub C; Tourné Y; Rumelhart C; Saragaglia D
Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot; 1997; 83(3):237-42. PubMed ID: 9255359
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
51. Locking-plate osteosynthesis versus intramedullary nailing for fixation of olecranon fractures: a biomechanical study.
Nowak TE; Burkhart KJ; Andres T; Dietz SO; Klitscher D; Mueller LP; Rommens PM
Int Orthop; 2013 May; 37(5):899-903. PubMed ID: 23508868
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
52. A biomechanical comparison of various methods of stabilization of subtrochanteric fractures of the femur.
Tencer AF; Johnson KD; Johnston DW; Gill K
J Orthop Res; 1984; 2(3):297-305. PubMed ID: 6491820
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
53. An in vitro biomechanical investigation of an MP35N intramedullary interlocking nail system for repair of third metacarpal fractures in adult horses.
Galuppo LD; Stover SM; Aldridge A; Hewes C; Taylor KT
Vet Surg; 2002; 31(3):211-25. PubMed ID: 11994848
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
54. Use of locking compression plates for long bone nonunions without removing existing intramedullary nail: review of literature and our experience.
Nadkarni B; Srivastav S; Mittal V; Agarwal S
J Trauma; 2008 Aug; 65(2):482-6. PubMed ID: 18695487
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
55. Biomechanical analysis of blade plate versus locking plate fixation for a proximal humerus fracture: comparison using cadaveric and synthetic humeri.
Siffri PC; Peindl RD; Coley ER; Norton J; Connor PM; Kellam JF
J Orthop Trauma; 2006 Sep; 20(8):547-54. PubMed ID: 16990726
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
56. [Biomechanical evaluation of nickel-titanium shape-memory alloy enclosed interlocking intramedular nail].
Cao YM; Zhao WD; Zhang MC; Bao K; Da GZ
Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao; 2006 May; 26(5):584-6. PubMed ID: 16762855
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
57. [Unreamed locking intramedullary nailing of humeral fractures--basic evaluation of a patient group].
Fric V; Pazdírek P; Bartonícek J
Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech; 2001; 68(6):345-56. PubMed ID: 11847926
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
58. Dynamic compression plating versus locked intramedullary nailing for humeral shaft fractures in adults.
Kurup H; Hossain M; Andrew JG
Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2011 Jun; (6):CD005959. PubMed ID: 21678350
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
59. Biomechanical measurements of stiffness and strength for five types of whole human and artificial humeri.
Aziz MS; Nicayenzi B; Crookshank MC; Bougherara H; Schemitsch EH; Zdero R
J Biomech Eng; 2014 May; 136(5):051006. PubMed ID: 24598846
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
60. Combination of anatomical locking plate and retrograde intramedullary nail in distal femoral fractures: comparison of mechanical stability.
Başcı O; Karakaşlı A; Kumtepe E; Güran O; Havıtçıoğlu H
Eklem Hastalik Cerrahisi; 2015; 26(1):21-6. PubMed ID: 25741916
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
