相似文献
1
Classifications in brief: Paprosky classification of acetabular bone loss.
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013 Nov;471(11):3725-30. doi: 10.1007/s11999-013-3264-4. Epub 2013 Aug 31.
2
Notes from the acetabular side: mono to modular options.
Orthopedics. 2007 Sep;30(9):746-7. doi: 10.3928/01477447-20070901-21.
3
Validity and reliability of the Paprosky acetabular defect classification.
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013 Jul;471(7):2259-65. doi: 10.1007/s11999-013-2844-7. Epub 2013 Feb 15.
4
[Analysis of validity and reliability of three radiographic classification systems for preoperative assessment of bone stock loss in revision total hip arthroplasty].
Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb. 2004 Jan-Feb;142(1):33-9. doi: 10.1055/s-2004-818027.
5
6
Severe metal-induced osteolysis many years after unipolar hip endoprosthesis.
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013 Jul;471(7):2078-82. doi: 10.1007/s11999-012-2780-y. Epub 2013 Jan 5.
7
Pubic ramus convexity or ballooning: a sentinel sign for severe periacetabular osteolysis in total hip arthroplasty.
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2014 Jan;134(1):99-101. doi: 10.1007/s00402-013-1887-2. Epub 2013 Nov 13.
8
Acetabular reconstruction in revision total hip arthroplasty: maximizing function and outcomes in protrusio and cavitary defects.
Instr Course Lect. 2014;63:219-25.
9
Cup-cage reconstruction for severe acetabular bone loss and pelvic discontinuity: Mid-term Results of a Consecutive Series of 35 Cases.
Bone Joint J. 2018 Nov;100-B(11):1442-1448. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.100B11.BJJ-2018-0481.R1.
10
Evaluation and Treatment of Patients With Acetabular Osteolysis After Total Hip Arthroplasty.
J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2019 Mar 15;27(6):e258-e267. doi: 10.5435/JAAOS-D-16-00685.
引用本文的文献
1
Use of Bone Bank Grafts in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: Patient Characteristics at a Referral Center.
Medicina (Kaunas). 2025 Jul 10;61(7):1246. doi: 10.3390/medicina61071246.
2
Comparison of the Trabecular Titanium Acetabular Shell with Burch-Schneider Cages in Revision Hip Arthroplasty.
J Clin Med. 2025 Jun 19;14(12):4381. doi: 10.3390/jcm14124381.
3
Acetabular screws placement in primary and revision total hip arthroplasty: a narrative review.
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2025 Jun 25;145(1):354. doi: 10.1007/s00402-025-05961-2.
4
Outcomes of Two-Stage Autograft Acetabular Reconstruction for Hip Replacement in Young Patients: A Series of 13 Cases.
Cureus. 2025 Mar 1;17(3):e79897. doi: 10.7759/cureus.79897. eCollection 2025 Mar.
5
Characterizing acetabular defects and need of major reconstruction during total hip arthroplasty in patients with acetabular protrusion- a retrospective study.
J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2025 Jan 12;63:102847. doi: 10.1016/j.jcot.2024.102847. eCollection 2025 Apr.
6
Adverse Local Tissue Reaction and Osteolysis After Ceramic-on-Ceramic Total Hip Arthroplasty.
Arthroplast Today. 2024 Dec 7;30:101584. doi: 10.1016/j.artd.2024.101584. eCollection 2024 Dec.
7
Clinical and functional outcomes of a modular fluted titanium stem in complex hip surgery with femoral bone loss.
J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2024 Nov 26;59:102843. doi: 10.1016/j.jcot.2024.102843. eCollection 2024 Dec.
8
Use of morselized bone allograft in revision hip arthroplasty for massive acetabular defect: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
J Exp Orthop. 2024 Dec 4;11(4):e70091. doi: 10.1002/jeo2.70091. eCollection 2024 Oct.
9
Isolated Liner Exchange and Bone Grafting for the Management of Periacetabular Osteolysis in Well-Fixed Cups with an Intact Locking Mechanism at Short-Term to Medium-Term Follow-Up: A Systematic Review.
HSS J. 2024 Nov;20(4):567-576. doi: 10.1177/15563316231189736. Epub 2023 Sep 7.
10
Reliability and validity of the Paprosky classification for acetabular bone loss based on level of orthopedic training.
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2024 Sep;144(9):4267-4273. doi: 10.1007/s00402-024-05524-x. Epub 2024 Sep 23.
本文引用的文献
1
Acetabular bone loss in revision total hip arthroplasty: evaluation and management.
J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2013 Mar;21(3):128-39. doi: 10.5435/JAAOS-21-03-128.
2
Validity and reliability of the Paprosky acetabular defect classification.
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013 Jul;471(7):2259-65. doi: 10.1007/s11999-013-2844-7. Epub 2013 Feb 15.
3
A comparison of the validity and reliability of established bone stock loss classification systems and the proposal of a novel classification system.
Hip Int. 2010 Jan-Mar;20(1):50-5. doi: 10.1177/112070001002000108.
4
Grading acetabular defects: the need for a universal and valid system.
J Arthroplasty. 2010 Apr;25(3):425-31. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2009.02.021. Epub 2009 Apr 18.
5
Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030.
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007 Apr;89(4):780-5. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.F.00222.
6
Acetabular revision using a trabecular metal acetabular component for severe acetabular bone loss associated with a pelvic discontinuity.
J Arthroplasty. 2006 Sep;21(6 Suppl 2):87-90. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2006.05.015.
7
The use of a trabecular metal acetabular component and trabecular metal augment for severe acetabular defects.
J Arthroplasty. 2006 Sep;21(6 Suppl 2):83-6. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2006.05.008.
8
Porous-ingrowth revision acetabular implants secured with peripheral screws. A minimum twelve-year follow-up.
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006 Jun;88(6):1266-71. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.E.00540.
9
Prevalence of primary and revision total hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 1990 through 2002.
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005 Jul;87(7):1487-97. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.D.02441.
10
Classification and an algorithmic approach to the reconstruction of femoral deficiency in revision total hip arthroplasty.
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003;85-A Suppl 4:1-6. doi: 10.2106/00004623-200300004-00001.
Zotero 插件