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.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

456 related items for PubMed ID: 19168806

  • 1. Biomechanical evaluation of bioabsorbable versus metallic screws for posterior cruciate ligament inlay graft fixation: a comparative study.
    Gupta A, Lattermann C, Busam M, Riff A, Bach BR, Wang VM.
    Am J Sports Med; 2009 Apr; 37(4):748-53. PubMed ID: 19168806
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. Comparison of tibial graft fixation between simulated arthroscopic and open inlay techniques for posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.
    Campbell RB, Torrie A, Hecker A, Sekiya JK.
    Am J Sports Med; 2007 Oct; 35(10):1731-8. PubMed ID: 17554103
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Tibial fixation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with bone-patellar tendon-bone and semitendinosus-gracilis autografts: a comparison between bioabsorbable screws and bioabsorbable cross-pin fixation.
    Volpi P, Marinoni L, Bait C, Galli M, de Girolamo L.
    Am J Sports Med; 2009 Apr; 37(4):808-12. PubMed ID: 19218557
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Tibial fixation of bone-patellar tendon-bone grafts in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a cadaveric study of bovine bone screw and biodegradable interference screw.
    Zheng N, Price CT, Indelicato PA, Gao B.
    Am J Sports Med; 2008 Dec; 36(12):2322-7. PubMed ID: 18765676
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Prospective evaluation of patellar tendon graft fixation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction comparing composite bioabsorbable and allograft interference screws.
    Tecklenburg K, Burkart P, Hoser C, Rieger M, Fink C.
    Arthroscopy; 2006 Sep; 22(9):993-9. PubMed ID: 16952730
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. Biomechanical evaluation of cross-pin versus interference screw tibial fixation using a soft-tissue graft during transtibial posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.
    Lee YS, Wang JH, Bae JH, Lim HC, Park JH, Ahn JH, Bae TS, Lim BO.
    Arthroscopy; 2009 Sep; 25(9):989-95. PubMed ID: 19732637
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Primary stability of hamstring graft fixation with biodegradable suspension versus interference screws.
    Weimann A, Rodieck M, Zantop T, Hassenpflug J, Petersen W.
    Arthroscopy; 2005 Mar; 21(3):266-74. PubMed ID: 15756178
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. Primary stability of three posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction procedures: a biomechanical in vitro study.
    Kitamura N, Yasuda K, Tohyama H, Yamanaka M, Tanabe Y.
    Arthroscopy; 2005 Aug; 21(8):970-8. PubMed ID: 16084295
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Open screw fixation versus arthroscopic suture fixation of tibial posterior cruciate ligament avulsion injuries: a mechanical comparison.
    Sasaki SU, da Mota e Albuquerque RF, Amatuzzi MM, Pereira CA.
    Arthroscopy; 2007 Nov; 23(11):1226-30. PubMed ID: 17986411
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. MRI in ACL reconstructive surgery with PDLLA bioabsorbable interference screws: evaluation of degradation and osteointegration processes of bioabsorbable screws.
    Macarini L, Murrone M, Marini S, Mocci A, Ettorre GC.
    Radiol Med; 2004 Nov; 107(1-2):47-57. PubMed ID: 15031696
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Open tibial inlay versus arthroscopic transtibial posterior cruciate ligament reconstructions.
    Panchal HB, Sekiya JK.
    Arthroscopy; 2011 Sep; 27(9):1289-95. PubMed ID: 21831568
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. Suture versus screw fixation of displaced tibial eminence fractures: a biomechanical comparison.
    Bong MR, Romero A, Kubiak E, Iesaka K, Heywood CS, Kummer F, Rosen J, Jazrawi L.
    Arthroscopy; 2005 Oct; 21(10):1172-6. PubMed ID: 16226643
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. Posterior cruciate ligament revision reconstruction, part 2: results of revision using a 2-strand quadriceps tendon-patellar bone autograft.
    Noyes FR, Barber-Westin SD.
    Am J Sports Med; 2005 May; 33(5):655-65. PubMed ID: 15722278
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Soft-tissue interference fixation: bioabsorbable screw versus metal screw.
    Brand JC, Nyland J, Caborn DN, Johnson DL.
    Arthroscopy; 2005 Aug; 21(8):911-6. PubMed ID: 16084287
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. An anatomical and biomechanical comparison of anteromedial and anterolateral approaches for tibial tunnel of posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: evaluation of the widening effect of the anterolateral approach.
    Ahn JH, Bae JH, Lee YS, Choi K, Bae TS, Wang JH.
    Am J Sports Med; 2009 Sep; 37(9):1777-83. PubMed ID: 19470944
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Does a tensioning device pinned to the tibia improve knee anterior-posterior load-displacement compared to manual tensioning of the graft following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction? A cadaveric study of two tibial fixation devices.
    Thompson DM, Hull ML, Howell SM.
    J Orthop Res; 2006 Sep; 24(9):1832-41. PubMed ID: 16865723
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Cyclic loading comparison between biodegradable interference screw fixation and biodegradable double cross-pin fixation of human bone-patellar tendon-bone grafts.
    Zantop T, Ruemmler M, Welbers B, Langer M, Weimann A, Petersen W.
    Arthroscopy; 2005 Aug; 21(8):934-41. PubMed ID: 16084290
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Biomechanical comparison of the docking technique with and without humeral bioabsorbable interference screw fixation.
    Hurbanek JG, Anderson K, Crabtree S, Karnes GJ.
    Am J Sports Med; 2009 Mar; 37(3):526-33. PubMed ID: 19168809
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Arthroscopic reconstruction of the posterior cruciate ligament using tibial-inlay and double-bundle technique.
    Kim SJ, Park IS.
    Arthroscopy; 2005 Oct; 21(10):1271. PubMed ID: 16226662
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. A biomechanical comparison of initial fixation strength of 3 different methods of anterior cruciate ligament soft tissue graft tibial fixation: resistance to monotonic and cyclic loading.
    Bartz RL, Mossoni K, Tyber J, Tokish J, Gall K, Siparsky PN.
    Am J Sports Med; 2007 Jun; 35(6):949-54. PubMed ID: 17435059
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 23.