Computerized navigation for total hip arthroplasty is associated with lower complications and ninety-day readmissions: a nationwide linked analysis

[1]  W. Maloney,et al.  Computer Navigation vs Conventional Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Medicare Database Analysis. , 2019, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[2]  K. Ong,et al.  Computer-Assisted Navigation Is Associated with Reductions in the Rates of Dislocation and Acetabular Component Revision Following Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty , 2019, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[3]  P. Sculco,et al.  Risk Factors for Early Dislocation Following Primary Elective Total Hip Arthroplasty. , 2018, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[4]  F. Picard,et al.  Computer Navigation Helps Reduce the Incidence of Noise After Ceramic-on-Ceramic Total Hip Arthroplasty. , 2017, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[5]  James H. MacDonald,et al.  Incidence, Risk Factors, and Costs for Hospital Returns After Total Joint Arthroplasties. , 2017, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[6]  S. Kurtz,et al.  Which Clinical and Patient Factors Influence the National Economic Burden of Hospital Readmissions After Total Joint Arthroplasty? , 2017, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[7]  C. Hidaka,et al.  All-Cause Versus Complication-Specific Readmission Following Total Knee Arthroplasty , 2017, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[8]  Ove Furnes,et al.  Survivorship and relative risk of revision in computer-navigated versus conventional total knee replacement at 8-year follow-up , 2016, Acta orthopaedica.

[9]  Ahmed A. Aoude,et al.  Thirty-Day Complications of Conventional and Computer-Assisted Total Knee and Total Hip Arthroplasty: Analysis of 103,855 Patients in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Database. , 2016, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[10]  T. Fabre,et al.  EOS-based cup navigation: Randomised controlled trial in 78 total hip arthroplasties. , 2016, Orthopaedics & traumatology, surgery & research : OTSR.

[11]  J. Argenson,et al.  No Benefit After THA Performed With Computer-assisted Cup Placement: 10-year Results of a Randomized Controlled Study , 2016, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[12]  M. Pagnano,et al.  What Safe Zone? The Vast Majority of Dislocated THAs Are Within the Lewinnek Safe Zone for Acetabular Component Position , 2016, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[13]  K. Deep,et al.  Reproduction of Hip Offset and Leg Length in Navigated Total Hip Arthroplasty: How Accurate Are We? , 2015, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[14]  Yen-Liang Liu,et al.  Computer navigation for total knee arthroplasty reduces revision rate for patients less than sixty-five years of age. , 2015, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[15]  Timothy M Wright,et al.  Cup position alone does not predict risk of dislocation after hip arthroplasty. , 2015, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[16]  S. Affatato.  The history of total hip arthroplasty (THA) , 2014 .

[17]  Young-Hoo Kim,et al.  Computer-navigated versus conventional total knee arthroplasty a prospective randomized trial. , 2012, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[18]  S. Mahant,et al.  Kasabach–Merritt phenomenon: a single centre experience , 2010, European journal of haematology.

[19]  D. Markel,et al.  Evaluation of component positioning in primary total hip arthroplasty using an imageless navigation device compared with traditional methods. , 2009, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[20]  Aamer Malik,et al.  Precision and Bias of Imageless Computer Navigation and Surgeon Estimates for Acetabular Component Position , 2007, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[21]  K. Bozic,et al.  An overview of economic issues in computer-assisted total joint arthroplasty. , 2007, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.