Format
Sort by

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 151

1.

Similar range of motion and function after resurfacing large-head or standard total hip arthroplasty.

Penny JØ, Ovesen O, Varmarken JE, Overgaard S.

Acta Orthop. 2013 Jun;84(3):246-53. doi: 10.3109/17453674.2013.788435. Epub 2013 Mar 26.

2.

A comparison of total hip resurfacing and total hip arthroplasty - patients and outcomes.

Fowble VA, dela Rosa MA, Schmalzried TP.

Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis. 2009;67(2):108-12.

3.

Resurfacing matched to standard total hip arthroplasty by preoperative activity levels - a comparison of postoperative outcomes.

Zywiel MG, Marker DR, McGrath MS, Delanois RE, Mont MA.

Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis. 2009;67(2):116-9.

4.

No clinical difference between large metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty and 28-mm-head total hip arthroplasty?

Zijlstra WP, van den Akker-Scheek I, Zee MJ, van Raay JJ.

Int Orthop. 2011 Dec;35(12):1771-6. doi: 10.1007/s00264-011-1233-7. Epub 2011 Mar 4.

5.

[Mid-term effectiveness of total hip arthroplasty with collum femoris preserving prosthesis].

Li M, Hu Y, Li K, Liao Q, Wen T, Zhong D.

Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2012 Aug;26(8):897-901. Chinese.

PMID:
23012917
6.

Range of motion after stemmed total hip arthroplasty and hip resurfacing - a clinical study.

Le Duff MJ, Wisk LE, Amstutz HC.

Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis. 2009;67(2):177-81.

7.

Hip resurfacing in patients under thirty years old: an attractive option for young and active patients.

Krantz N, Miletic B, Migaud H, Girard J.

Int Orthop. 2012 Sep;36(9):1789-94. doi: 10.1007/s00264-012-1555-0. Epub 2012 May 11.

8.

[Surgical principles and clinical experiences with the DUROM hip resurfacing system using a lateral approach].

Gravius S, Mumme T, Weber O, Berdel P, Wirtz DC.

Oper Orthop Traumatol. 2009 Dec;21(6):586-601. doi: 10.1007/s00064-009-2007-x. German.

PMID:
20087719
9.

[Effect of femoral offset change on pain and function after total hip arthroplasty].

Xu B, Yang D, Aili R, Cao L.

Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2013 Jul;27(7):843-6. Chinese.

PMID:
24063174
10.

Outcomes after metal-on-metal hip resurfacing: could we achieve better function?

Newman MA, Barker KL, Pandit H, Murray DW.

Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2008 Apr;89(4):660-6. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2007.09.045.

PMID:
18373996
11.

Femoral head to neck offset after hip resurfacing is critical for range of motion.

Girard J, Krantz N, Bocquet D, Wavreille G, Migaud H.

Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2012 Feb;27(2):165-9. doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2011.08.013. Epub 2011 Sep 16.

PMID:
21925779
12.

Uncemented ceramic-on-ceramic THA in adults with osteonecrosis of the femoral head.

Millar NL, Halai M, McKenna R, McGraw IW, Millar LL, Hadidi M.

Orthopedics. 2010 Nov 2;33(11):795. doi: 10.3928/01477447-20100924-13.

PMID:
21053883
13.

No difference in gait recovery after THA with different head diameters: a prospective randomized study.

Zagra L, Anasetti F, Bianchi L, Licari V, Giacometti Ceroni R.

Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013 Dec;471(12):3830-7. doi: 10.1007/s11999-013-2926-6.

14.

Recovery of function following hip resurfacing arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial comparing an accelerated versus standard physiotherapy rehabilitation programme.

Barker KL, Newman MA, Hughes T, Sackley C, Pandit H, Kiran A, Murray DW.

Clin Rehabil. 2013 Sep;27(9):771-84. doi: 10.1177/0269215513478437. Epub 2013 Apr 10.

PMID:
23576032
15.

Resurfacing versus conventional total hip arthroplasty - review of comparative clinical and basic science studies.

Marker DR, Strimbu K, McGrath MS, Zywiel MG, Mont MA.

Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis. 2009;67(2):120-7. Review.

16.

[Accuracy improvement of acetabular component placement using non-image based surgical navigation system].

Yu Z, Wang L, Gui J.

Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2007 Oct;21(10):1057-61. Chinese.

PMID:
17990769
17.

Gait symmetry: a comparison of hip resurfacing and jumbo head total hip arthroplasty patients.

Queen RM, Watters TS, Abbey AN, Sabesan VJ, Vail TP, Bolognesi MP.

J Arthroplasty. 2011 Aug;26(5):680-5. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2010.07.022. Epub 2010 Sep 29.

PMID:
20884168
18.

High preoperative range of motion is a significant risk factor for dislocation in primary total hip arthroplasty.

Krenzel BA, Berend ME, Malinzak RA, Faris PM, Keating EM, Meding JB, Ritter MA.

J Arthroplasty. 2010 Sep;25(6 Suppl):31-5. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2010.04.007. Epub 2010 Jun 11.

PMID:
20541892
19.

Computerized range of motion analysis following dual mobility total hip arthroplasty, traditional total hip arthroplasty, and hip resurfacing.

Klingenstein GG, Yeager AM, Lipman JD, Westrich GH.

J Arthroplasty. 2013 Aug;28(7):1173-6. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2012.08.017. Epub 2013 Mar 9.

PMID:
23477855
20.

Which procedure better restores intact hip range of motion: total hip arthroplasty or resurfacing? A combined cadaveric and computer simulation study.

Incavo SJ, Thompson MT, Gold JE, Patel RV, Icenogle KD, Noble PC.

J Arthroplasty. 2011 Apr;26(3):391-7. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2010.02.001. Epub 2010 Apr 8.

PMID:
20378308
Items per page

Supplemental Content

Write to the Help Desk