174 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 14666550)
21. Cervical spine arthroplasty biomechanics.
Puttlitz CM; DiAngelo DJ
Neurosurg Clin N Am; 2005 Oct; 16(4):589-94, v. PubMed ID: 16326281
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Re: Sasso R, Heller J, Hacker B, Smucker J. Artificial disc versus fusion. A prospective, randomized study with 2-years follow-up on 99 patients. Spine 2007;32:2933-40.
Botelho RV
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2008 May; 33(10):1156-7; author reply 1157. PubMed ID: 18449052
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
23. Total lumbar disc replacement: different results for different levels.
Siepe CJ; Mayer HM; Heinz-Leisenheimer M; Korge A
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2007 Apr; 32(7):782-90. PubMed ID: 17414914
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Biomechanical analysis of rotational motions after disc arthroplasty: implications for patients with adult deformities.
McAfee PC; Cunningham BW; Hayes V; Sidiqi F; Dabbah M; Sefter JC; Hu N; Beatson H
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2006 Sep; 31(19 Suppl):S152-60. PubMed ID: 16946633
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. [Fusion or replacement: reevaluation of the bone grafting and fusion of the cervical vertebrae].
Yuan W
Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2005 Jan; 85(1):11-4. PubMed ID: 15808067
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
26. "Cage" technology revolutionizes approach to spinal fusion surgery.
Lestini WF
N C Med J; 1998; 59(2):101-4. PubMed ID: 9558897
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
27. Re: Zigler J, Delamarter R, Spivak J, et al. Results of the prospective, randomized, multicenter Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption study of the ProDisc-L total disc replacement versus circumferential fusion for the treatment of 1-level degenerative disc disease. Spine 2007;32:1155-62.
Fairbank J
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2007 Dec; 32(25):2929-30; author reply 2930-1. PubMed ID: 18246024
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
28. Nucleus replacement with the DASCOR disc arthroplasty device: interim two-year efficacy and safety results from two prospective, non-randomized multicenter European studies.
Ahrens M; Tsantrizos A; Donkersloot P; Martens F; Lauweryns P; Le Huec JC; Moszko S; Fekete Z; Sherman J; Yuan HA; Halm H
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2009 Jun; 34(13):1376-84. PubMed ID: 19440167
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Bryan cervical disc prosthesis: 12-month clinical outcome.
Amit A; Dorward N
Br J Neurosurg; 2007 Oct; 21(5):478-84. PubMed ID: 17852103
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Cervical disc arthroplasty: general introduction.
Acosta FL; Ames CP
Neurosurg Clin N Am; 2005 Oct; 16(4):603-7, vi. PubMed ID: 16326283
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. [ProDisc-C mobile replacement of an intervertebral disc. A prospective mono-centric two-year study].
Stulík J; Kryl J; Sebesta P; Vyskocil T; Krbec M; Trc T
Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech; 2008 Aug; 75(4):253-61. PubMed ID: 18760080
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Why a mechanical disc?
Errico TJ
Spine J; 2004; 4(6 Suppl):151S-157S. PubMed ID: 15541660
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Cervical disk prostheses in clinical practice.
Jonker BP
Neurosurgery; 2010 Nov; 67(5):E1472-3; author reply E1473. PubMed ID: 20871430
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
34. Revision and explantation strategies involving the CHARITE lumbar artificial disc replacement.
Leary SP; Regan JJ; Lanman TH; Wagner WH
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2007 Apr; 32(9):1001-11. PubMed ID: 17450076
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Material considerations for intervertebral disc replacement implants.
Taksali S; Grauer JN; Vaccaro AR
Spine J; 2004; 4(6 Suppl):231S-238S. PubMed ID: 15541671
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. No justification for cervical disk prostheses in clinical practice: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Bartels RH; Donk R; Verbeek AL
Neurosurgery; 2010 Jun; 66(6):1153-60; discussion 1160. PubMed ID: 20421840
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. New disc bests fusion.
Duke Med Health News; 2007 Jan; 13(1):11. PubMed ID: 17299891
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
38. Comparison of adverse events between the Bryan artificial cervical disc and anterior cervical arthrodesis.
Anderson PA; Sasso RC; Riew KD
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2008 May; 33(12):1305-12. PubMed ID: 18496341
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Evaluation of surgical volume and the early experience with lumbar total disc replacement as part of the investigational device exemption study of the Charité Artificial Disc.
Regan JJ; McAfee PC; Blumenthal SL; Guyer RD; Geisler FH; Garcia R; Maxwell JH
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2006 Sep; 31(19):2270-6. PubMed ID: 16946666
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Lumbar disc arthroplasty: a critical review.
Resnick DK; Watters WC
Clin Neurosurg; 2007; 54():83-7. PubMed ID: 18504901
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
