These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

110 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 14520032)

  • 1. Failure of human cervical endplates: a cadaveric experimental model.
    Truumees E; Demetropoulos CK; Yang KH; Herkowitz HN
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2003 Oct; 28(19):2204-8. PubMed ID: 14520032
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Effect of endplate conditions and bone mineral density on the compressive strength of the graft-endplate interface in anterior cervical spine fusion.
    Lim TH; Kwon H; Jeon CH; Kim JG; Sokolowski M; Natarajan R; An HS; Andersson GB
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2001 Apr; 26(8):951-6. PubMed ID: 11317120
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Correlation of ProDisc-C failure strength with cervical bone mineral content and endplate strength.
    Zhang X; Ordway NR; Tan R; Rim BC; Fayyazi AH
    J Spinal Disord Tech; 2008 Aug; 21(6):400-5. PubMed ID: 18679093
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Loss of cervical endplate integrity following minimal surface preparation.
    Cheng CC; Ordway NR; Zhang X; Lu YM; Fang H; Fayyazi AH
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2007 Aug; 32(17):1852-5. PubMed ID: 17762292
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The effects of bone density and disc degeneration on the structural property distributions in the lower lumbar vertebral endplates.
    Grant JP; Oxland TR; Dvorak MF; Fisher CG
    J Orthop Res; 2002 Sep; 20(5):1115-20. PubMed ID: 12382980
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A study on the structural properties of the lumbar endplate: histological structure, the effect of bone density, and spinal level.
    Hou Y; Luo Z
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2009 May; 34(12):E427-33. PubMed ID: 19454994
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Effects of endplate removal on the structural properties of the lower lumbar vertebral bodies.
    Oxland TR; Grant JP; Dvorak MF; Fisher CG
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2003 Apr; 28(8):771-7. PubMed ID: 12698119
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Evolution of bone mineral density after percutaneous kyphoplasty in fresh osteoporotic vertebral body fractures and adjacent vertebrae along with sagittal spine alignment.
    Korovessis P; Zacharatos S; Repantis T; Michael A; Karachalios D
    J Spinal Disord Tech; 2008 Jun; 21(4):293-8. PubMed ID: 18525491
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Influence of screw positioning in a new anterior spine fixator on implant loosening in osteoporotic vertebrae.
    Reinhold M; Schwieger K; Goldhahn J; Linke B; Knop C; Blauth M
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2006 Feb; 31(4):406-13. PubMed ID: 16481950
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Regional variation in vertebral bone morphology and its contribution to vertebral fracture strength.
    Hulme PA; Boyd SK; Ferguson SJ
    Bone; 2007 Dec; 41(6):946-57. PubMed ID: 17913613
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. [The effect of disc degeneration on the structural property distributions in the cervical vertebral endplates].
    Li JY; Zhao WD; Zhu QA; Yuan L; Li M; Lin LJ; Zhang MC
    Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi; 2004 Nov; 42(21):1330-2. PubMed ID: 15634437
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Biomechanical comparison of cervical spine reconstructive techniques after a multilevel corpectomy of the cervical spine.
    Singh K; Vaccaro AR; Kim J; Lorenz EP; Lim TH; An HS
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2003 Oct; 28(20):2352-8; discussion 2358. PubMed ID: 14560082
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Cement augmentation of vertebral screws enhances the interface strength between interbody device and vertebral body.
    Tan JS; Bailey CS; Dvorak MF; Fisher CG; Cripton PA; Oxland TR
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2007 Feb; 32(3):334-41. PubMed ID: 17268265
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A biomechanical study of regional endplate strength and cage morphology as it relates to structural interbody support.
    Lowe TG; Hashim S; Wilson LA; O'Brien MF; Smith DA; Diekmann MJ; Trommeter J
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2004 Nov; 29(21):2389-94. PubMed ID: 15507800
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Does Spanning a Lateral Lumbar Interbody Cage Across the Vertebral Ring Apophysis Increase Loads Required for Failure and Mitigate Endplate Violation.
    Briski DC; Goel VK; Waddell BS; Serhan H; Kodigudla MK; Palepu V; Agarwal AK; Zavatsky JM
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2017 Oct; 42(20):E1158-E1164. PubMed ID: 28472018
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Mechanical response of cervical vertebral endplates to axial loading.
    Schröder J; Herbort M; Rustemeyer P; Vieth V; Wassmann H
    Zentralbl Neurochir; 2006 Nov; 67(4):188-92. PubMed ID: 17106833
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. A new bone surrogate model for testing interbody device subsidence.
    Au AG; Aiyangar AK; Anderson PA; Ploeg HL
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2011 Jul; 36(16):1289-96. PubMed ID: 21311401
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Biomechanical analysis of thoracolumbar interbody constructs. How important is the endplate?
    Hollowell JP; Vollmer DG; Wilson CR; Pintar FA; Yoganandan N
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 1996 May; 21(9):1032-6. PubMed ID: 8724086
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The distribution of mineral density in the cervical vertebral endplates.
    Müller-Gerbl M; Weißer S; Linsenmeier U
    Eur Spine J; 2008 Mar; 17(3):432-438. PubMed ID: 18193299
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Cortical bone trajectory for lumbar pedicle screws.
    Santoni BG; Hynes RA; McGilvray KC; Rodriguez-Canessa G; Lyons AS; Henson MA; Womack WJ; Puttlitz CM
    Spine J; 2009 May; 9(5):366-73. PubMed ID: 18790684
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.