357 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18427306)
1. Implications of lumbar plexus anatomy for removal of total disc replacements through a posterior approach.
Bumpass DB; Keller TC; Robinson EP; Marks I; Iwanik M; Arlet V; Shen FH
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2008 Apr; 33(9):E274-8. PubMed ID: 18427306
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Anatomic mapping of lumbar nerve roots during a direct lateral transpsoas approach to the spine: a cadaveric study.
Banagan K; Gelb D; Poelstra K; Ludwig S
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2011 May; 36(11):E687-91. PubMed ID: 21217450
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Access strategies for revision or explantation of the Charité lumbar artificial disc replacement.
Wagner WH; Regan JJ; Leary SP; Lanman TH; Johnson JP; Rao RK; Cossman DV
J Vasc Surg; 2006 Dec; 44(6):1266-72. PubMed ID: 17145428
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. The paraspinal splitting approach: a possible approach to perform multiple intercosto-lumbar neurotizations: an anatomic study.
Vialle R; Harding I; Charosky S; Tadié M
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2007 Oct; 32(22):E631-4. PubMed ID: 18090071
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Biomechanical comparison of a two-level Maverick disc replacement with a hybrid one-level disc replacement and one-level anterior lumbar interbody fusion.
Erkan S; Rivera Y; Wu C; Mehbod AA; Transfeldt EE
Spine J; 2009 Oct; 9(10):830-5. PubMed ID: 19477692
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Morphometric analysis of the ventral nerve roots and retroperitoneal vessels with respect to the minimally invasive lateral approach in normal and deformed spines.
Regev GJ; Chen L; Dhawan M; Lee YP; Garfin SR; Kim CW
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2009 May; 34(12):1330-5. PubMed ID: 19455010
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. An anatomic study of the lumbar plexus with respect to retroperitoneal endoscopic surgery.
Moro T; Kikuchi S; Konno S; Yaginuma H
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2003 Mar; 28(5):423-8; discussion 427-8. PubMed ID: 12616150
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Analysis of a retrieved polyethylene total disc replacement component.
Kurtz SM; Peloza J; Siskey R; Villarraga ML
Spine J; 2005; 5(3):344-50. PubMed ID: 15863092
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Defining the safe working zones using the minimally invasive lateral retroperitoneal transpsoas approach: an anatomical study.
Uribe JS; Arredondo N; Dakwar E; Vale FL
J Neurosurg Spine; 2010 Aug; 13(2):260-6. PubMed ID: 20672964
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Removal of the Charité lumbar artificial disc prosthesis: surgical technique.
de Maat GH; Punt IM; van Rhijn LW; Schurink GW; van Ooij A
J Spinal Disord Tech; 2009 Jul; 22(5):334-9. PubMed ID: 19525788
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The relationship of intrapsoas nerves during a transpsoas approach to the lumbar spine: anatomic study.
Park DK; Lee MJ; Lin EL; Singh K; An HS; Phillips FM
J Spinal Disord Tech; 2010 Jun; 23(4):223-8. PubMed ID: 20084033
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Safe zone for retractor placement to the lumbar spine via the transpsoas approach.
Spivak JM; Paulino CB; Patel A; Shanti N; Pathare N
J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong); 2013 Apr; 21(1):77-81. PubMed ID: 23629994
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Revision strategies in lumbar total disc arthroplasty.
Patel AA; Brodke DS; Pimenta L; Bono CM; Hilibrand AS; Harrop JS; Riew KD; Youssef JA; Vaccaro AR
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2008 May; 33(11):1276-83. PubMed ID: 18469704
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The relation between the lumbar vertebrae and the spinal nerves for far lateral lumbar spinal approaches.
Güvençer M; Naderi S; Kiray A; Yilmaz HS; Tetik S
J Clin Neurosci; 2008 Feb; 15(2):192-7. PubMed ID: 17997316
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. An anatomical study of the lumbosacral plexus as related to the minimally invasive transpsoas approach to the lumbar spine.
Benglis DM; Vanni S; Levi AD
J Neurosurg Spine; 2009 Feb; 10(2):139-44. PubMed ID: 19278328
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Precision of traditional approaches for lumbar plexus block: impact and management of interindividual anatomic variability.
Heller AR; Fuchs A; Rössel T; Vicent O; Wiessner D; Funk RH; Koch T; Litz RJ
Anesthesiology; 2009 Sep; 111(3):525-32. PubMed ID: 19672183
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Assessment of neuroforaminal decompression in degenerative spinal stenosis.
Gill TJ; Mason MD
Clin Orthop Relat Res; 1998 Mar; (348):135-9. PubMed ID: 9553545
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. [The clinic anatomy of lumbar plexus in the lumbar anterolaterally approach minimally invasive surgery].
Lu S; Xu YQ; Ding ZH; Shi JH; Wang YL; Zhong SZ
Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi; 2008 May; 46(9):647-9. PubMed ID: 18956712
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. In situ contact analysis of the prosthesis components of Prodisc-L in lumbar spine following total disc replacement.
Chen WM; Park C; Lee K; Lee S
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2009 Sep; 34(20):E716-23. PubMed ID: 19752690
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
