1. Learmonth ID, Young C, Rorabeck C. The operation of the century: total hip replacement. Lancet 370(9597): 1508, 2007
2. Massin P, Geais L, Astoin E, Simondi M, Lavaste F. The anatomic basis for the concept of lateralized femoral stems: a frontal plane radiographic study of the proximal femur. The Journal of arthroplasty 15(1): 93, 2000
3. Ishii S, Homma Y, Baba T, Ozaki Y, Matsumoto M, Kaneko K. Does the Canal Fill Ratio and Femoral Morphology of Asian Females Influence Early Radiographic Outcomes of Total Hip Arthroplasty With an Uncemented Proximally Coated, Tapered-Wedge Stem? The Journal of arthroplasty 31(7): 1524, 2016
4. Cooper HJ, Jacob AP, Rodriguez JA. Distal fixation of proximally coated tapered stems may predispose to a failure of osteointegration. The Journal of arthroplasty 26(6 Suppl): 78, 2011
5. Wuestemann T, Hoare SG, Petersik A, Hofstaetter B, Fehily M, Matsubara M, Markel DC. Bone morphology of the proximal femoral canal: ethnicity related differences and the influence on cementless tapered wedge stem designs. Hip international : the journal of clinical and experimental research on hip pathology and therapy: 1120700019895458, 2019
6. Zhao R, Cai H, Liu Y, Tian H, Zhang K, Liu Z. Risk Factors for Intraoperative Proximal Femoral Fracture During Primary Cementless THA. Orthopedics 40(2): e281, 2017
7. Tang ZH, Yeoh CSN, Tan GMJ. Radiographic study of the proximal femur morphology of elderly patients with femoral neck fractures: is there a difference among ethnic groups? Singapore Med J 58(12): 717, 2017
8. Yang Z, Jian W, Li Z-h, Jun X, Liang Z, Ge Y, Shi Z-j. The geometry of the bone structure associated with total hip arthroplasty. PLoS One 9(3): e91058, 2014
9. Noble PC, Alexander JW, Lindahl LJ, Yew DT, Granberry WM, Tullos HS. The anatomic basis of femoral component design. Clinical orthopaedics and related research (235): 148, 1988
10. Boymans TA, Heyligers IC, Grimm B. The Morphology of the Proximal Femoral Canal Continues to Change in the Very Elderly: Implications for Total Hip Arthroplasty. The Journal of arthroplasty 30(12): 2328, 2015
11. Rorabeck CH. Cementless femoral components should be made from cobalt chrome. Clinical orthopaedics and related research (325): 326, 1996
12. Tostain O, Debuyzer E, Benad K, Putman S, Pierache A, Girard J, Pasquier G. Ten-year outcomes of cementless anatomical femoral implants after 3D computed tomography planning. Follow-up note. Orthopaedics & traumatology, surgery & research : OTSR 105(5): 937, 2019
13. Cassidy RS, S Oh, Beverland DE. Guidelines for the follow-up of total hip arthroplasty: do they need to be revised? The bone & joint journal 101-b(5): 536, 2019
14. Lennon AB, Prendergast PJ. Evaluation of cement stresses in finite element analyses of cemented orthopaedic implants. J Biomech Eng 123(6): 623, 2001
15. Goodman SB. The effects of micromotion and particulate materials on tissue differentiation. Bone chamber studies in rabbits. Acta orthopaedica Scandinavica Supplementum 258: 1, 1994
16. Trieb K, Huber D, Sonntag R, Kretzer JP. Finite Element Analysis and Biomechanical Testing of the New MiniMIS Short Stem. Zeitschrift fur Orthopadie und Unfallchirurgie 157(2): 188, 2019
17. Walker PS, Robertson DD. Design and fabrication of cementless hip stems. Clinical orthopaedics and related research (235): 25, 1988
18. Liang H-D, Yang W-Y, Pan J-K, Huang H-T, Luo M-H, Zeng L-F, Liu J. Are short-stem prostheses superior to conventional stem prostheses in primary total hip arthroplasty? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ Open 8(9): e021649, 2018
19. Rubin PJ, Leyvraz PF, Aubaniac JM, Argenson JN, Estève P, de Roguin B. The morphology of the proximal femur. A three-dimensional radiographic analysis. The Journal of bone and joint surgery British volume 74(1): 28, 1992
20. Haddad FS, Garbuz DS, Duncan CP, Janzen DL, Munk PL. CT evaluation of periacetabular osteotomies. The Journal of bone and joint surgery British volume 82(4): 526, 2000
21. Noble PC, Alexander JW, Lindahl LJ, Yew DT, Granberry WM, Tullos HS. The anatomic basis of femoral component design. Clinical orthopaedics and related research (235): 148, 1988
22. Casper DS, Kim GK, Parvizi J, Freeman TA. Morphology of the proximal femur differs widely with age and sex: relevance to design and selection of femoral prostheses. Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society 30(7): 1162, 2012
23. Ruff CB, Hayes WC. Sex differences in age-related remodeling of the femur and tibia. Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society 6(6): 886, 1988
24. Laine HJ, Lehto MU, Moilanen T. Diversity of proximal femoral medullary canal. The Journal of arthroplasty 15(1): 86, 2000
25. Baharuddin MY, Salleh S-H, Zulkifly AH, Lee MH, Mohd Noor A. Morphological study of the newly designed cementless femoral stem. Biomed Res Int 2014: 692328, 2014
26. Sen RK, Tripathy SK, Kumar R, Kumar A, Dhatt S, Dhillon MS, Nagi ON, Gulati M. Proximal femoral medullary canal diameters in Indians: correlation between anatomic, radiographic, and computed tomographic measurements. Journal of orthopaedic surgery (Hong Kong) 18(2): 189, 2010