2479 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 14588950)
1. Bilateral implantation of low-profile interbody fusion cages: subsidence, lordosis, and fusion analysis.
Schiffman M; Brau SA; Henderson R; Gimmestad G
Spine J; 2003; 3(5):377-87. PubMed ID: 14588950
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. [Adjacent segment degeneration after lumbosacral fusion in spondylolisthesis: a retrospective radiological and clinical analysis].
Zencica P; Chaloupka R; Hladíková J; Krbec M
Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech; 2010 Apr; 77(2):124-30. PubMed ID: 20447355
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Influence of cage geometry on sagittal alignment in instrumented posterior lumbar interbody fusion.
Gödde S; Fritsch E; Dienst M; Kohn D
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2003 Aug; 28(15):1693-9. PubMed ID: 12897494
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Anterior lumbar fusion with paired BAK standard and paired BAK Proximity cages: subsidence incidence, subsidence factors, and clinical outcome.
Beutler WJ; Peppelman WC
Spine J; 2003; 3(4):289-93. PubMed ID: 14589189
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Radiographic comparison of L5-S1 lateral anterior lumbar interbody fusion cage subsidence and displacement by fixation strategy: anterior plate versus integrated screws.
Theologis AA; Patel S; Burch S
J Neurosurg Spine; 2023 Jan; 38(1):126-130. PubMed ID: 36057128
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Posterior lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative spondylolisthesis: restoration of sagittal balance using insert-and-rotate interbody spacers.
Sears W
Spine J; 2005; 5(2):170-9. PubMed ID: 15749617
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Rigid, semirigid versus dynamic instrumentation for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: a correlative radiological and clinical analysis of short-term results.
Korovessis P; Papazisis Z; Koureas G; Lambiris E
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2004 Apr; 29(7):735-42. PubMed ID: 15087795
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Anterior cervical fusion: a comparison of cage, dowel and dowel-plate constructs.
Cauthen JC; Theis RP; Allen AT
Spine J; 2003; 3(2):106-17; discussion 117. PubMed ID: 14589223
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. [Short-term effectiveness of nano-hydroxyapatite/polyamide-66 intervertebral cage for lumbar interbody fusion in patients with lower lumbar degenerative diseases].
Yang X; Song Y; Kong Q; Gong Q; Pei F; Tu C
Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi; 2012 Dec; 26(12):1425-9. PubMed ID: 23316629
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Radiographic and clinical evaluation of cage subsidence after stand-alone lateral interbody fusion.
Marchi L; Abdala N; Oliveira L; Amaral R; Coutinho E; Pimenta L
J Neurosurg Spine; 2013 Jul; 19(1):110-8. PubMed ID: 23662890
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Increased cage angle effects on radiographic outcomes after stand-alone anterior lumbar interbody fusion.
Nguyen AQ; Ukogu C; Harvey JP; Federico VP; Nolte MT; Khanna K; Sheha ED; Gandhi SD; Phillips FM
J Neurosurg Spine; 2023 Aug; 39(2):254-262. PubMed ID: 37148223
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Posterior lumbar interbody fusion using recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein type 2 with cylindrical interbody cages.
Haid RW; Branch CL; Alexander JT; Burkus JK
Spine J; 2004; 4(5):527-38; discussion 538-9. PubMed ID: 15363423
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Posterior lumbar interbody fusion with stand-alone Trabecular Metal cages for repeatedly recurrent lumbar disc herniation and back pain.
Lequin MB; Verbaan D; Bouma GJ
J Neurosurg Spine; 2014 Jun; 20(6):617-22. PubMed ID: 24678638
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: the effect of various instrumentation techniques on the flexibility of the lumbar spine.
Harris BM; Hilibrand AS; Savas PE; Pellegrino A; Vaccaro AR; Siegler S; Albert TJ
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2004 Feb; 29(4):E65-70. PubMed ID: 15094547
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Prospective, randomized, multicenter Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption study of lumbar total disc replacement with the CHARITE artificial disc versus lumbar fusion: five-year follow-up.
Guyer RD; McAfee PC; Banco RJ; Bitan FD; Cappuccino A; Geisler FH; Hochschuler SH; Holt RT; Jenis LG; Majd ME; Regan JJ; Tromanhauser SG; Wong DC; Blumenthal SL
Spine J; 2009 May; 9(5):374-86. PubMed ID: 18805066
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Posterior lumbar interbody fusion for lytic spondylolisthesis: restoration of sagittal balance using insert-and-rotate interbody spacers.
Sears W
Spine J; 2005; 5(2):161-9. PubMed ID: 15749616
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Radiological evaluation of anterior lumbar fusion using PEEK cages with adjacent vertebral autograft in spinal deformity long fusion surgeries.
Ni J; Zheng Y; Liu N; Wang X; Fang X; Phukan R; Wood KB
Eur Spine J; 2015 Apr; 24(4):791-9. PubMed ID: 25618451
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. [One-segment interbody lumbar arthrodesis using impacted cages: posterior unilateral approach versus posterior bilateral approach].
Commarmond J
Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot; 2001 Apr; 87(2):129-34. PubMed ID: 11319424
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis treated with instrumented posterior lumbar interbody fusion in U.S. servicemen.
Molinari RW; Sloboda JF; Arrington EC
J Spinal Disord Tech; 2005 Feb; 18 Suppl():S24-9. PubMed ID: 15699802
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A prospective, randomized, multicenter Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption study of lumbar total disc replacement with the CHARITE artificial disc versus lumbar fusion: part II: evaluation of radiographic outcomes and correlation of surgical technique accuracy with clinical outcomes.
McAfee PC; Cunningham B; Holsapple G; Adams K; Blumenthal S; Guyer RD; Dmietriev A; Maxwell JH; Regan JJ; Isaza J
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2005 Jul; 30(14):1576-83; discussion E388-90. PubMed ID: 16025025
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
