Format
Items per page
Sort by

Send to:

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 164

1.

A quantitative method to assess focal acetabular overcoverage resulting from pincer deformity using CT data.

Murphy RJ, Subhawong TK, Chhabra A, Carrino JA, Armand M, Hungerford M.

Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011 Oct;469(10):2846-54. doi: 10.1007/s11999-011-1958-z. Epub 2011 Jul 12.

2.

Reliability of overcoverage parameters with varying morphologic pincer features: comparison of EOS® and radiography.

Monazzam S, Agashe M, Hosalkar HS.

Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013 Aug;471(8):2578-85. doi: 10.1007/s11999-013-3001-z. Epub 2013 May 9.

3.

Quantifying the contribution of pincer deformity to femoro-acetabular impingement using 3D computerised tomography.

Dandachli W, Najefi A, Iranpour F, Lenihan J, Hart A, Cobb J.

Skeletal Radiol. 2012 Sep;41(10):1295-300. doi: 10.1007/s00256-012-1389-2. Epub 2012 Mar 17.

PMID:
22426775
4.

Effect of changes in pelvic tilt on range of motion to impingement and radiographic parameters of acetabular morphologic characteristics.

Ross JR, Nepple JJ, Philippon MJ, Kelly BT, Larson CM, Bedi A.

Am J Sports Med. 2014 Oct;42(10):2402-9. doi: 10.1177/0363546514541229. Epub 2014 Jul 24.

PMID:
25060073
5.

The crossover sign overestimates acetabular retroversion.

Zaltz I, Kelly BT, Hetsroni I, Bedi A.

Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013 Aug;471(8):2463-70. doi: 10.1007/s11999-012-2689-5.

6.

Pincer deformity does not lead to osteoarthritis of the hip whereas acetabular dysplasia does: acetabular coverage and development of osteoarthritis in a nationwide prospective cohort study (CHECK).

Agricola R, Heijboer MP, Roze RH, Reijman M, Bierma-Zeinstra SM, Verhaar JA, Weinans H, Waarsing JH.

Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2013 Oct;21(10):1514-21. doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2013.07.004. Epub 2013 Jul 9.

7.

Coxa profunda: is the deep acetabulum overcovered?

Anderson LA, Kapron AL, Aoki SK, Peters CL.

Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012 Dec;470(12):3375-82. doi: 10.1007/s11999-012-2509-y.

8.

Residual deformity is the most common reason for revision hip arthroscopy: a three-dimensional CT study.

Ross JR, Larson CM, Adeoye O, Kelly BT, Bedi A.

Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015 Apr;473(4):1388-95. doi: 10.1007/s11999-014-4069-9. Erratum in: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015 Mar;473(3):1167. Adeoyo, Olusanjo [corrected to Adeoye, Olusanjo].

9.

Computer-assisted modeling of osseous impingement and resection in femoroacetabular impingement.

Bedi A, Dolan M, Magennis E, Lipman J, Buly R, Kelly BT.

Arthroscopy. 2012 Feb;28(2):204-10. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2011.11.005.

PMID:
22244100
10.

Functional acetabular orientation varies between supine and standing radiographs: implications for treatment of femoroacetabular impingement.

Ross JR, Tannenbaum EP, Nepple JJ, Kelly BT, Larson CM, Bedi A.

Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015 Apr;473(4):1267-73. doi: 10.1007/s11999-014-4104-x.

11.

What are the radiographic reference values for acetabular under- and overcoverage?

Tannast M, Hanke MS, Zheng G, Steppacher SD, Siebenrock KA.

Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015 Apr;473(4):1234-46. doi: 10.1007/s11999-014-4038-3.

12.

Radiographic analysis of femoroacetabular impingement with Hip2Norm-reliable and validated.

Tannast M, Mistry S, Steppacher SD, Reichenbach S, Langlotz F, Siebenrock KA, Zheng G.

J Orthop Res. 2008 Sep;26(9):1199-205. doi: 10.1002/jor.20653.

13.

Does radiographic coxa profunda indicate increased acetabular coverage or depth in hip dysplasia?

Fujii M, Nakamura T, Hara T, Nakashima Y, Iwamoto Y.

Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015 Jun;473(6):2056-66. doi: 10.1007/s11999-014-4084-x. Epub 2014 Dec 5.

14.

Novel CT-based three-dimensional software improves the characterization of cam morphology.

Milone MT, Bedi A, Poultsides L, Magennis E, Byrd JW, Larson CM, Kelly BT.

Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013 Aug;471(8):2484-91. doi: 10.1007/s11999-013-2809-x.

15.

A quantitative non-invasive assessment of femoroacetabular impingement with CT-based dynamic simulation--cadaveric validation study.

Röling MA, Visser MI, Oei EH, Pilot P, Kleinrensink GJ, Bloem RM.

BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2015 Mar 11;16:50. doi: 10.1186/s12891-015-0504-7.

16.

Which radiographic hip parameters do not have to be corrected for pelvic rotation and tilt?

Tannast M, Fritsch S, Zheng G, Siebenrock KA, Steppacher SD.

Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015 Apr;473(4):1255-66. doi: 10.1007/s11999-014-3936-8.

17.

Radiographic features associated with differing impinging hip morphologies with special attention to coxa profunda.

Boone G, Pagnotto MR, Walker JA, Trousdale RT, Sierra RJ.

Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012 Dec;470(12):3368-74. doi: 10.1007/s11999-012-2539-5.

18.

Anterior inferior iliac spine morphology correlates with hip range of motion: a classification system and dynamic model.

Hetsroni I, Poultsides L, Bedi A, Larson CM, Kelly BT.

Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013 Aug;471(8):2497-503. doi: 10.1007/s11999-013-2847-4.

19.

Reliability and predictability of the centre-edge angle in the assessment of pincer femoroacetabular impingement.

Kutty S, Schneider P, Faris P, Kiefer G, Frizzell B, Park R, Powell JN.

Int Orthop. 2012 Mar;36(3):505-10. doi: 10.1007/s00264-011-1302-y. Epub 2011 Jul 1.

20.

An accurate method of radiological assessment of acetabular volume and orientation in computed tomography spatial reconstruction.

Jóźwiak M, Rychlik M, Musielak B, Chen BP, Idzior M, Grzegorzewski A.

BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2015 Feb 25;16:42. doi: 10.1186/s12891-015-0503-8.

Format
Items per page
Sort by

Send to:

Choose Destination

Supplemental Content

Write to the Help Desk