272 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15682010)
1. Anterior cervical plate fixation: a biomechanical study to evaluate the effects of plate design, endplate preparation, and bone mineral density.
Dvorak MF; Pitzen T; Zhu Q; Gordon JD; Fisher CG; Oxland TR
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2005 Feb; 30(3):294-301. PubMed ID: 15682010
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with a locked plate and wedged graft effectively stabilizes flexion-distraction stage-3 injury in the lower cervical spine: a biomechanical study.
Paxinos O; Ghanayem AJ; Zindrick MR; Voronov LI; Havey RM; Carandang G; Hadjipavlou A; Patwardhan AG
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2009 Jan; 34(1):E9-15. PubMed ID: 19127153
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. In vitro biomechanical comparison of multistrand cables with conventional cervical stabilization.
Weis JC; Cunningham BW; Kanayama M; Parker L; McAfee PC
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 1996 Sep; 21(18):2108-14. PubMed ID: 8893435
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Biomechanical comparison of anterior cervical plating and combined anterior/lateral mass plating.
Adams MS; Crawford NR; Chamberlain RH; Bse ; Sonntag VK; Dickman CA
Spine J; 2001; 1(3):166-70. PubMed ID: 14588343
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Enhancement of stability following anterior cervical corpectomy: a biomechanical study.
Singh K; Vaccaro AR; Kim J; Lorenz EP; Lim TH; An HS
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2004 Apr; 29(8):845-9. PubMed ID: 15082982
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. In vitro comparison of bioresorbable and titanium anterior cervical plates in the immediate postoperative condition.
Freeman AL; Derincek A; Beaubien BP; Buttermann GR; Lew WD; Wood KB
J Spinal Disord Tech; 2006 Dec; 19(8):577-83. PubMed ID: 17146301
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Anterior cervical fixation: analysis of load-sharing and stability with use of static and dynamic plates.
Brodke DS; Klimo P; Bachus KN; Braun JT; Dailey AT
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2006 Jul; 88(7):1566-73. PubMed ID: 16818983
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Biomechanical comparison of cervical interbody cage versus structural bone graft.
Greene DL; Crawford NR; Chamberlain RH; Park SC; Crandall D
Spine J; 2003; 3(4):262-9. PubMed ID: 14589184
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Biomechanical evaluation of a newly developed monocortical expansion screw for use in anterior internal fixation of the cervical spine. In vitro comparison with two established internal fixation systems.
Richter M; Wilke HJ; Kluger P; Claes L; Puhl W
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 1999 Feb; 24(3):207-12. PubMed ID: 10025014
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A Novel Anterior Odontoid Screw Plate for C1-C3 Internal Fixation: An In Vitro Biomechanical Study.
Hu Y; Dong WX; Kepler CK; Yuan ZS; Sun XY; Zhang J; Xie H
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2016 Jan; 41(2):E64-72. PubMed ID: 26555834
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Biomechanical analysis of a new concept: an add-on dynamic extension plate for adjacent-level anterior cervical fusion.
Fassett DR; Apfelbaum R; Clark R; Bachus KN; Brodke DS
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2005 Nov; 30(22):2523-9. PubMed ID: 16284590
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Biomechanical evaluation of stand-alone interbody fusion cages in the cervical spine.
Shimamoto N; Cunningham BW; Dmitriev AE; Minami A; McAfee PC
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2001 Oct; 26(19):E432-6. PubMed ID: 11698902
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Biomechanics of an integrated interbody device versus ACDF anterior locking plate in a single-level cervical spine fusion construct.
Stein MI; Nayak AN; Gaskins RB; Cabezas AF; Santoni BG; Castellvi AE
Spine J; 2014 Jan; 14(1):128-36. PubMed ID: 24231054
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Zero-profile hybrid fusion construct versus 2-level plate fixation to treat adjacent-level disease in the cervical spine.
Healy AT; Sundar SJ; Cardenas RJ; Mageswaran P; Benzel EC; Mroz TE; Francis TB
J Neurosurg Spine; 2014 Nov; 21(5):753-60. PubMed ID: 25170655
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Anterior occiput to axis screw fixation: part II: a biomechanical comparison with posterior fixation techniques.
Dvorak MF; Sekeramayi F; Zhu Q; Hoekema J; Fisher C; Boyd M; Goertzen DJ; Oxland TR
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2003 Feb; 28(3):239-45. PubMed ID: 12567024
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. A new stand-alone cervical anterior interbody fusion device: biomechanical comparison with established anterior cervical fixation devices.
Scholz M; Reyes PM; Schleicher P; Sawa AG; Baek S; Kandziora F; Marciano FF; Crawford NR
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2009 Jan; 34(2):156-60. PubMed ID: 19139665
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Malaligned dynamic anterior cervical plate: a biomechanical analysis of effectiveness.
Lawrence BD; Patel AA; Guss A; Ryan Spiker W; Brodke DS
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2014 Dec; 39(25):2057-61. PubMed ID: 25271506
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. A comparative biomechanical study of traditional and in-line plating systems following immediate stabilization of single and bi-level cervical segments.
Hunter W; Bucklen B; Muzumdar A; Moldavsky M; Hussain M; Khalil S
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2012 Jan; 27(1):84-90. PubMed ID: 21824696
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Can an Endplate-conformed Cervical Cage Provide a Better Biomechanical Environment than a Typical Non-conformed Cage?: A Finite Element Model and Cadaver Study.
Zhang F; Xu HC; Yin B; Xia XL; Ma XS; Wang HL; Yin J; Shao MH; Lyu FZ; Jiang JY
Orthop Surg; 2016 Aug; 8(3):367-76. PubMed ID: 27627721
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A biomechanical comparison of modern anterior and posterior plate fixation of the cervical spine.
Do Koh Y; Lim TH; Won You J; Eck J; An HS
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2001 Jan; 26(1):15-21. PubMed ID: 11148640
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
