309 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11285420)
61. Trans-foraminal versus posterior lumbar interbody fusion: comparison of surgical morbidity.
Mehta VA; McGirt MJ; Garcés Ambrossi GL; Parker SL; Sciubba DM; Bydon A; Wolinsky JP; Gokaslan ZL; Witham TF
Neurol Res; 2011 Jan; 33(1):38-42. PubMed ID: 20546682
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
62. The Oblique Anterolateral Approach to the Lumbar Spine Provides Access to the Lumbar Spine With Few Early Complications.
Mehren C; Mayer HM; Zandanell C; Siepe CJ; Korge A
Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2016 Sep; 474(9):2020-7. PubMed ID: 27160744
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
63. Revision of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion using anterior lumbar interbody fusion: a biomechanical study in nonosteoporotic bone.
Ploumis A; Wu C; Mehbod A; Fischer G; Faundez A; Wu W; Transfeldt E
J Neurosurg Spine; 2010 Jan; 12(1):82-7. PubMed ID: 20043769
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
64. Positional effects of transforaminal interbody spacer placement at the L5-S1 intervertebral disc space: a biomechanical study.
Tallarico RA; Lavelle WF; J Bianco A; Taormina JL; Ordway NR
Spine J; 2014 Dec; 14(12):3018-24. PubMed ID: 25007755
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
65. Comparison of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion outcomes in patients receiving rhBMP-2 versus autograft.
Khan TR; Pearce KR; McAnany SJ; Peters CM; Gupta MC; Zebala LP
Spine J; 2018 Mar; 18(3):439-446. PubMed ID: 28822825
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
66. Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Multilevel: Comparison with Conventional Transforaminal Interbody Fusion.
Lee WC; Park JY; Kim KH; Kuh SU; Chin DK; Kim KS; Cho YE
World Neurosurg; 2016 Jan; 85():236-43. PubMed ID: 26386459
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
67. Outcomes of anterior vs. posterior approach to single-level lumbar spinal fusion with interbody device: An analysis of the nationwide inpatient sample.
De Stefano F; Haddad H; Mayo T; Nouman M; Fiani B
Clin Neurol Neurosurg; 2022 Jan; 212():107061. PubMed ID: 34863055
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
68. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of degenerative lumbar diseases.
Shunwu F; Xing Z; Fengdong Z; Xiangqian F
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2010 Aug; 35(17):1615-20. PubMed ID: 20479702
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
69. Unilateral lumbar interbody fusion (ULIF).
Zachee B; Vanden Berghe L
Acta Orthop Belg; 2016 Aug; 82(2):412-420. PubMed ID: 27682307
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
70. Long-term durability of minimal invasive posterior transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a clinical and radiographic follow-up.
Rouben D; Casnellie M; Ferguson M
J Spinal Disord Tech; 2011 Jul; 24(5):288-96. PubMed ID: 20975594
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
71. Full-Endoscopic Lumbar Fusion Outcomes in Patients with Minimal Deformities: A Retrospective Study of Data Collected Between 2011 and 2015.
Kamson S; Lu D; Sampson PD; Zhang Y
Pain Physician; 2019 Jan; 22(1):75-88. PubMed ID: 30700071
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
72. Clinical and radiographic comparison of mini-open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in 42 patients with long-term follow-up.
Dhall SS; Wang MY; Mummaneni PV
J Neurosurg Spine; 2008 Dec; 9(6):560-5. PubMed ID: 19035748
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
73. Assessment of radiographic and clinical outcomes of an articulating expandable interbody cage in minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for spondylolisthesis.
Massie LW; Zakaria HM; Schultz LR; Basheer A; Buraimoh MA; Chang V
Neurosurg Focus; 2018 Jan; 44(1):E8. PubMed ID: 29290133
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
74. [The PLIF and TLIF techniques. Indication, technique, advantages, and disadvantages].
Fleege C; Rickert M; Rauschmann M
Orthopade; 2015 Feb; 44(2):114-23. PubMed ID: 25588711
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
75. Clinical outcomes of two minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) for lumbar degenerative diseases.
Tian Y; Liu X
Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol; 2016 Oct; 26(7):745-51. PubMed ID: 26943871
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
76. Clinical Outcomes of Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion versus Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Three-Level Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.
Fan G; Wu X; Yu S; Sun Q; Guan X; Zhang H; Gu X; He S
Biomed Res Int; 2016; 2016():9540298. PubMed ID: 27747244
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
77. Comparison of adjacent segment disease after minimally invasive or open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.
Yee TJ; Terman SW; La Marca F; Park P
J Clin Neurosci; 2014 Oct; 21(10):1796-801. PubMed ID: 24880486
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
78. Overpowering posterior lumbar instrumentation and fusion with hyperlordotic anterior lumbar interbody cages followed by posterior revision: a preliminary feasibility study.
Kadam A; Wigner N; Saville P; Arlet V
J Neurosurg Spine; 2017 Dec; 27(6):650-660. PubMed ID: 28960160
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
79. Posterolateral fusion (PLF) versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) for spondylolisthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Levin JM; Tanenbaum JE; Steinmetz MP; Mroz TE; Overley SC
Spine J; 2018 Jun; 18(6):1088-1098. PubMed ID: 29452283
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
80. Mini-transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus anterior lumbar interbody fusion augmented by percutaneous pedicle screw fixation: a comparison of surgical outcomes in adult low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis.
Kim JS; Kang BU; Lee SH; Jung B; Choi YG; Jeon SH; Lee HY
J Spinal Disord Tech; 2009 Apr; 22(2):114-21. PubMed ID: 19342933
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
