Format
Items per page
Sort by

Send to:

Choose Destination

Results: 1 to 20 of 107

Similar articles for PubMed (Select 23450022)

1.

Does pre-coating total knee tibial implants affect the risk of aseptic revision?

Bini SA, Chen Y, Khatod M, Paxton EW.

Bone Joint J. 2013 Mar;95-B(3):367-70. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.95B3.27585.

PMID:
23450022
2.

Case series report: Early cement-implant interface fixation failure in total knee replacement.

Hazelwood KJ, O'Rourke M, Stamos VP, McMillan RD, Beigler D, Robb WJ 3rd.

Knee. 2015 Mar 17. pii: S0968-0160(15)00049-6. doi: 10.1016/j.knee.2015.02.016. [Epub ahead of print]

PMID:
25795544
3.

Trabecular bone density of the proximal tibia as it relates to failure of a total knee replacement.

Ritter MA, Davis KE, Small SR, Merchun JG, Farris A.

Bone Joint J. 2014 Nov;96-B(11):1503-9. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.96B11.33465.

PMID:
25371464
4.

Failure of aseptic revision total knee arthroplasties.

Leta TH, Lygre SH, Skredderstuen A, Hallan G, Furnes O.

Acta Orthop. 2015 Feb;86(1):48-57. doi: 10.3109/17453674.2014.964097. Epub 2014 Sep 30.

5.

The effect of tibial component sizing on patient reported outcome measures following uncemented total knee replacement.

Abram SG, Marsh AG, Brydone AS, Nicol F, Mohammed A, Spencer SJ.

Knee. 2014 Oct;21(5):955-9. doi: 10.1016/j.knee.2014.05.010. Epub 2014 Jun 2.

PMID:
25017484
6.

Do refinements to original designs improve outcome of total knee replacement? A retrospective cohort study.

Piepers MJ, van Hove RP, van den Bekerom MP, Nolte PA.

J Orthop Surg Res. 2014 Feb 6;9:7. doi: 10.1186/1749-799X-9-7.

7.

Increased risk of revision for high flexion total knee replacement with thicker tibial liners.

Namba RS, Inacio MC, Cafri G.

Bone Joint J. 2014 Feb;96-B(2):217-23. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.96B2.32625.

PMID:
24493187
8.

Surgeon, implant, and patient variables may explain variability in early revision rates reported for unicompartmental arthroplasty.

Bini S, Khatod M, Cafri G, Chen Y, Paxton EW.

J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013 Dec 18;95(24):2195-202. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.L.01006.

PMID:
24352773
9.

Learning curve for new technology?: a nationwide register-based study of 46,363 total knee arthroplasties.

Peltola M, Malmivaara A, Paavola M.

J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013 Dec 4;95(23):2097-103. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.L.01296.

PMID:
24306696
10.

Peri-implant bone strains and micro-motion following in vivo service: a postmortem retrieval study of 22 tibial components from total knee replacements.

Mann KA, Miller MA, Goodheart JR, Izant TH, Cleary RJ.

J Orthop Res. 2014 Mar;32(3):355-61. doi: 10.1002/jor.22534. Epub 2013 Nov 26.

11.

Monoblock all-polyethylene tibial components have a lower risk of early revision than metal-backed modular components.

Mohan V, Inacio MC, Namba RS, Sheth D, Paxton EW.

Acta Orthop. 2013 Dec;84(6):530-6. doi: 10.3109/17453674.2013.862459. Epub 2013 Nov 18.

12.

Risk factors for total knee arthroplasty aseptic revision.

Namba RS, Cafri G, Khatod M, Inacio MC, Brox TW, Paxton EW.

J Arthroplasty. 2013 Sep;28(8 Suppl):122-7. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2013.04.050. Epub 2013 Aug 15.

PMID:
23953394
13.

Early experience with the Vanguard complete total knee system: 2-7 years of follow-up and risk factors for revision.

Kievit AJ, Schafroth MU, Blankevoort L, Sierevelt IN, van Dijk CN, van Geenen RC.

J Arthroplasty. 2014 Feb;29(2):348-54. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2013.05.018. Epub 2013 Jun 15.

14.

Results with 98 Endo-Modell rotating hinge prostheses for primary knee arthroplasty.

Bistolfi A, Lustig S, Rosso F, Dalmasso P, Crova M, Massazza G.

Orthopedics. 2013 Jun;36(6):e746-52. doi: 10.3928/01477447-20130523-19.

PMID:
23746036
15.

Long-term survival of a flat-on-flat total condylar knee arthroplasty fixed with a hybrid cementing technique for tibial components.

Carulli C, Matassi F, Nistri L, Civinini R, Innocenti M.

J Long Term Eff Med Implants. 2012;22(4):305-12.

PMID:
23662661
16.

Survival rates and causes of revision in cemented primary total knee replacement: a report from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register 1994-2009.

G√łthesen O, Espehaug B, Havelin L, Petursson G, Lygre S, Ellison P, Hallan G, Furnes O.

Bone Joint J. 2013 May;95-B(5):636-42. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.95B5.30271.

PMID:
23632673
17.

Center and surgeon volume influence the revision rate following unicondylar knee replacement: an analysis of 23,400 medial cemented unicondylar knee replacements.

Baker P, Jameson S, Critchley R, Reed M, Gregg P, Deehan D.

J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013 Apr 17;95(8):702-9. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.L.00520.

PMID:
23595068
18.

Cementing techniques for the tibial component in primary total knee replacement.

Cawley DT, Kelly N, McGarry JP, Shannon FJ.

Bone Joint J. 2013 Mar;95-B(3):295-300. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.95B3.29586. Review.

PMID:
23450010
19.

Mid-term equivalent survival of medial and lateral unicondylar knee replacement: an analysis of data from a National Joint Registry.

Baker PN, Jameson SS, Deehan DJ, Gregg PJ, Porter M, Tucker K.

J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2012 Dec;94(12):1641-8. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.94B12.29416.

PMID:
23188905
20.

The design of the acetabular component and size of the femoral head influence the risk of revision following 34 721 single-brand cemented hip replacements: a retrospective cohort study of medium-term data from a National Joint Registry.

Jameson SS, Baker PN, Mason J, Gregg PJ, Brewster N, Deehan DJ, Reed MR.

J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2012 Dec;94(12):1611-7. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.94B12.30040.

PMID:
23188900
Format
Items per page
Sort by

Send to:

Choose Destination

Supplemental Content

Write to the Help Desk