Current Issue - November 2020, Volume 14, Issue No. 3

1. Daigle ME, Weinstein AM, Katz JN, Losina E. The cost-effectiveness of total joint arthroplasty: a systematic review of published literature. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2012; 26(5): 649-58. doi:10.1016/j.berh.2012.07.013
2. Bayliss LE, Culliford D, Monk AP, Glyn-Jones S, Prieto-Alhambra D, Judge A, et al. The effect of patient age at intervention on risk of implant revision after total replacement of the hip or knee: a population-based cohort study. Lancet. 2017; 389(10077): 1424-30. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)30059-4
3. Evans JT, Evans JP, Walker RW, Blom AW, Whitehouse MR, Sayers A. How long does a hip replacement last? A systematic review and meta-analysis of case series and national registry reports with more than 15 years of follow-up. Lancet. 2019; 393(10172): 647-54. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31665-9
4. Dorr LD, Luckett M, Conaty JP. Total hip arthroplasties in patients younger than 45 years. A nine- to ten-year follow-up study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1990; (260): 215-9.
5. Poss R P, Walker P, Spector M, Reilly DT, Robertson DD, Sledge CB. Strategies for improving fixation of femoral components in total hip Arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1988; (235): 181-94.
6. Rubin PJ, Leyvraz PF, Aubaniac JM, Argenson JN, Estève P, de Roguin B. The morphology of proximal femur. A threedimensional radiographic analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1992; 74(1): 28-32.
7. Noble PC, Alexander JW, Lindahl LJ, Yew DT, Granberry WM, Tullos HS. The anatomic basis of femoral component design. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1988; (235): 148-65.
8. Stiehl JB, Jacobson D, Carrera G. Morphological analysis of the proximal femur using quantitative computed tomography. Int Orthop. 2007; 31(3): 287-92. doi:10.1007/s00264-006-0182-z
9. Krishnamurthy AB, MacDonald SJ, Paprosky WG. 5- to 13-year follow-up study on cementless femoral components in revision surgery. J Arthroplasty. 1997; 12(8): 839-847. doi:10.1016/s0883-5403(97)90152-2
10. Walker PS, Douglas D, Robertson DD. Design and fabrication of cementless hip stems. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1988; (235): 25-34.
11. Noble PC, Box GG, Kamaric E, Fink MJ, Alexander JW, Tullos HS. The effect of aging on the shape of the proximal femur. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1995;(316):31-44.
12. Mahaisavariya B, Sitthiseripratip K, Tongdee T, Bohez ELJ, Sloten JV, Oris P. Morphological study of the proximal femur: a new method of geometrical assessment using 3-dimensional reverse engineering. Med Eng Phys. 2002; 24(9): 617-22. doi:10.1016/s1350-4533(02)00113-3
13. Siwach RC, Dahiya S. Anthropometric study of proximal femur geometry and its clinical application. Indian J Orthop. 2003; 37(4): 247-51. doi: 10.1055/s-0040-1712831
14. Rubin PJ, Leyvraz PF, Heegaard JH. Radiologic changes of anatomic parameters of the proximal femur as a function of its position in rotation. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot. 1989; 75(4): 209-15.
15. Engh CA, Bobyn JD, Glassman AH. Porous-coated hip replacement. The factors governing bone ingrowth, stress shielding, and clinical results. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1987: 69(1): 45-5.
16. Kate BR, Robert SL. The angle of femoral torsion. J Anat Soc India. 1963;12: 8-11
17. Sengodan VC, Sinmayanantham E, Kumar JS. Anthropometric analysis of the hip joint in South Indian population using computed tomography. Indian J Orthop. 2017; 51(2): 155-61. doi:10.4103/0019-5413.201709
18. Deshmukh TR, Kuthe AM, Ingole DS, Thakre SB. Prediction of femur bone geometry using anthropometric data of Indian population: a numerical approach. J Med Sci. 2010; 10: 12-8. doi: 10.3923/jms.2010.12.18
19. Saikia KC, Bhuyan SK, Rongphar R. Anthropometric study of the hip joint in Northeastern region population with computed tomography scan. Indian J Orthop. 2008; 42(3): 260-6. doi:10.4103/0019-5413.39572
20. Anderson JY, Trinkaus E. Patterns of sexual, bilateral and interpopulational variation in human femoral neck-shaft angles. J Anat. 1998; 192(2): 279-85. doi: 10.1046/j.1469-7580.1998.19220279.x
21. United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). Human Development Report 2019 Beyond income, beyond averages, beyond today: Inequalities in human development in the 21st century. New York: United Nations Development Programme (UNDP); 2019. 350 p. https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/hdr2019.pdf
22. Rawal BR, Ribeiro R, Malhotra R, Bhatnagar N. Anthropometric measurements to design best-fit femoral stem for the Indian population. Indian J Orthop. 2012;46:46-53. doi: 10.4103/0019-5413.91634
23. Umer M, Sepah YJ, Khan A, Wazir A, Ahmed M, Jawad MU. Morphology of the proximal femur in a Pakistani population. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2010; 18(3): 279-81. doi: 10.1177/230949901001800304

Abstract   |   Reference