Wayne Paprosky to Treatment Outcome
This is a "connection" page, showing publications Wayne Paprosky has written about Treatment Outcome.
Connection Strength
1.073
-
Medium term clinical outcomes of tibial cones in revision knee arthroplasty. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2021 Jan; 141(1):113-118.
Score: 0.093
-
The Use of Structural Distal Femoral Allograft for Acetabular Reconstruction of Paprosky Type IIIA Defects at a Mean 21 Years of Follow-Up. J Arthroplasty. 2016 Mar; 31(3):680-3.
Score: 0.066
-
Management of severe femoral bone loss in revision total hip arthroplasty. Orthop Clin North Am. 2015 Jul; 46(3):329-42, ix.
Score: 0.063
-
Managing femoral bone loss in revision total hip replacement: fluted tapered modular stems. Bone Joint J. 2013 Nov; 95-B(11 Suppl A):95-7.
Score: 0.057
-
Massive bone loss: allograft-prosthetic composites and beyond. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2012 Nov; 94(11 Suppl A):61-4.
Score: 0.054
-
Tantalum augments for Paprosky IIIA defects remain stable at midterm followup. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012 Feb; 470(2):395-401.
Score: 0.051
-
Modified hybrid stem fixation in revision TKA is durable at 2 to 10 years. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011 Mar; 469(3):839-46.
Score: 0.046
-
Use of the extended trochanteric osteotomy in treating prosthetic hip infection. J Arthroplasty. 2009 Jan; 24(1):49-55.
Score: 0.039
-
The use of a tripolar articulation in revision total hip arthroplasty: a minimum of 24 months' follow-up. J Arthroplasty. 2008 Dec; 23(8):1182-8.
Score: 0.039
-
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.
Score: 0.035
-
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.
Score: 0.034
-
The use of structural distal femoral allografts for acetabular reconstruction. Surgical technique. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006 Mar; 88 Suppl 1 Pt 1:92-9.
Score: 0.034
-
The treatment of acetabular bone defects with an associated pelvic discontinuity. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005 Dec; 441:216-20.
Score: 0.033
-
Posterior approach: back door in. Orthopedics. 2005 Sep; 28(9):931-3.
Score: 0.033
-
The use of structural distal femoral allografts for acetabular reconstruction. Average ten-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005 Apr; 87(4):760-5.
Score: 0.032
-
Femoral fixation in the face of considerable bone loss: the use of modular stems. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004 Dec; (429):227-31.
Score: 0.031
-
Extended trochanteric osteotomy in complex primary total hip arthroplasty. A brief note. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003 Dec; 85(12):2385-90.
Score: 0.029
-
The middle-aged patient with hip arthritis: the case for extensively coated stems. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002 Dec; (405):101-7.
Score: 0.027
-
Total acetabular allografts. Instr Course Lect. 1999; 48:67-76.
Score: 0.021
-
Distal fixation with fully coated stems in femoral revision: a 16-year follow-up. Orthopedics. 1998 Sep; 21(9):993-5.
Score: 0.020
-
Bypass fixation. Orthop Clin North Am. 1998 Apr; 29(2):319-29.
Score: 0.019
-
Osteolysis: surgical treatment. Instr Course Lect. 1998; 47:321-9.
Score: 0.019
-
Five to 14-year follow up on cementless femoral revisions. Orthopedics. 1996 Sep; 19(9):765-8.
Score: 0.017
-
Dual-Mobility Articulations for Patients at High Risk for Dislocation. J Arthroplasty. 2016 09; 31(9 Suppl):131-5.
Score: 0.017
-
The Use of Trabecular Metal Cones in Complex Primary and Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2015 Sep; 30(9 Suppl):90-3.
Score: 0.016
-
Total acetabular transplant allograft reconstruction of the severely deficient acetabulum. Semin Arthroplasty. 1995 Apr; 6(2):86-95.
Score: 0.016
-
Advances in acetabular reconstruction in revision total hip arthroplasty: maximizing function and outcomes after treatment of periacetabular osteolysis around the well-fixed shell. Instr Course Lect. 2014; 63:209-18.
Score: 0.015
-
Acetabular reconstruction in revision total hip arthroplasty: maximizing function and outcomes in protrusio and cavitary defects. Instr Course Lect. 2014; 63:219-25.
Score: 0.015
-
Effect of a second joint arthroplasty on metal ion levels after primary total hip arthroplasty. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 2013 Oct; 42(10):E84-7.
Score: 0.014
-
Advances in acetabular reconstruction in revision total hip arthroplasty: maximizing function and outcomes after treatment of periacetabular osteolysis around the well-fixed shell. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013 Sep 18; 95(18):1709-18.
Score: 0.014
-
Risk factors for dislocation after revision total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013 Feb; 471(2):410-6.
Score: 0.014
-
Corrosion at the head-neck taper as a cause for adverse local tissue reactions after total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012 Sep 19; 94(18):1655-61.
Score: 0.013
-
Metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty: causes and high incidence of early failure. Orthopedics. 2012 Jul 01; 35(7):e1009-16.
Score: 0.013
-
Do tantalum components provide adequate primary fixation in all acetabular revisions? Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2010 May; 96(3):235-41.
Score: 0.011
-
Minimally invasive quadriceps-sparing TKA: results of a comprehensive pathway for outpatient TKA. J Knee Surg. 2006 Apr; 19(2):145-8.
Score: 0.008
-
Managing bone loss in acetabular revision. Instr Course Lect. 2006; 55:287-97.
Score: 0.008
-
Rapid rehabilitation and recovery with minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004 Dec; (429):239-47.
Score: 0.008