Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 112

1.

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
2.

Is there a difference in total knee arthroplasty risk of revision in highly crosslinked versus conventional polyethylene?

Paxton EW, Inacio MC, Kurtz S, Love R, Cafri G, Namba RS.

Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015 Mar;473(3):999-1008. doi: 10.1007/s11999-014-4046-3.

3.

Can high-flexion tibial inserts improve range of motion after posterior cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty?

Crow BD, McCauley JC, Ezzet KA.

Orthopedics. 2010 Sep 7;33(9):667. doi: 10.3928/01477447-20100722-03.

PMID:
20839712
4.

LCS mobile-bearing total knee replacement. A 10-year's follow-up study.

Vogt JC, Saarbach C.

Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2009 May;95(3):177-82. doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2009.02.002. Epub 2009 Mar 27.

5.

Posterior slope of the tibial implant and the outcome of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Hernigou P, Deschamps G.

J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004 Mar;86-A(3):506-11.

PMID:
14996875
6.

A randomized controlled trial comparing "high-flex" vs "standard" posterior cruciate substituting polyethylene tibial inserts in total knee arthroplasty.

McCalden RW, MacDonald SJ, Bourne RB, Marr JT.

J Arthroplasty. 2009 Sep;24(6 Suppl):33-8. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2009.03.013. Epub 2009 May 15.

PMID:
19447001
7.

High-flexion versus conventional total knee arthroplasty: a 5-year study.

Endres S.

J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2011 Aug;19(2):226-9.

8.

Restoring the anatomical tibial slope and limb axis may maximise post-operative flexion in posterior-stabilised total knee replacements.

Singh G, Tan JH, Sng BY, Awiszus F, Lohmann CH, Nathan SS.

Bone Joint J. 2013 Oct;95-B(10):1354-8. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.95B10.31477.

PMID:
24078531
9.

Patellar clunk syndrome in fixed-bearing posterior-stabilised versus cruciate-substituting prostheses.

Tang YH, Wong WK, Wong HL.

J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2014 Apr;22(1):80-3.

10.

Tibiofemoral force following total knee arthroplasty: comparison of four prosthesis designs in vitro.

Nicholls RL, Schirm AC, Jeffcote BO, Kuster MS.

J Orthop Res. 2007 Nov;25(11):1506-12. Erratum in: J Orthop Res. 2008 Apr;26(4):578.

11.

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
12.

The NexGen LPS-flex to the knee prosthesis at a minimum of three years.

Kim TH, Lee DH, Bin SI.

J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008 Oct;90(10):1304-10. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.90B10.21050.

PMID:
18827239
13.

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
14.

Three-dimensional tibiofemoral articular contact kinematics of a cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty.

Li G, Suggs J, Hanson G, Durbhakula S, Johnson T, Freiberg A.

J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006 Feb;88(2):395-402.

PMID:
16452753
15.

Which total knee replacement implant should I pick? Correcting the pathology: the role of knee bearing designs.

Berend KR, Lombardi AV Jr, Adams JB.

Bone Joint J. 2013 Nov;95-B(11 Suppl A):129-32. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.95B11.32835.

PMID:
24187370
16.

Posterior cruciate ligament balancing in total knee replacement: the quantitative relationship between tightness of the flexion gap and tibial translation.

Christen B, Heesterbeek P, Wymenga A, Wehrli U.

J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2007 Aug;89(8):1046-50. Erratum in: J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2007 Oct;89(10):1408. Heesterbeek, P V [corrected to Heesterbeek, P].

17.

Effect of Surgical Caseload on Revision Rate Following Total and Unicompartmental Knee Replacement.

Liddle AD, Pandit H, Judge A, Murray DW.

J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2016 Jan 6;98(1):1-8. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.N.00487.

PMID:
26738897
18.

Severe tibial bone loss in revision total knee replacement managed with structural femoral head allograft: a prospective case series from the Royal London Hospital.

Lyall HS, Sanghrajka A, Scott G.

Knee. 2009 Oct;16(5):326-31. doi: 10.1016/j.knee.2009.02.007. Epub 2009 Apr 7.

PMID:
19356936
19.

Clinical evaluation of 292 Genesis II posterior stabilized high-flexion total knee arthroplasty: range of motion and predictors.

Fuchs MC, Janssen RP.

Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2015 Jan;25(1):161-6. doi: 10.1007/s00590-014-1467-3. Epub 2014 Jun 8.

PMID:
24908394
20.

High-flexion posterior-substituting versus cruciate-retaining prosthesis in total knee arthroplasty: functional outcome, range of motion and complication comparison.

Zhang Z, Zhu W, Zhang W.

Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2015 Jan;135(1):119-24. doi: 10.1007/s00402-014-2107-4. Epub 2014 Nov 12.

PMID:
25388862

Supplemental Content

Support Center