220 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18675496)
1. Comparison of cage designs for transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a biomechanical study.
Cho W; Wu C; Mehbod AA; Transfeldt EE
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2008 Oct; 23(8):979-85. PubMed ID: 18675496
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Interbody device endplate engagement effects on motion segment biomechanics.
Buttermann GR; Beaubien BP; Freeman AL; Stoll JE; Chappuis JL
Spine J; 2009 Jul; 9(7):564-73. PubMed ID: 19457722
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Biomechanical comparison of anterior lumbar interbody fusion and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.
Ploumis A; Wu C; Fischer G; Mehbod AA; Wu W; Faundez A; Transfeldt EE
J Spinal Disord Tech; 2008 Apr; 21(2):120-5. PubMed ID: 18391717
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Biomechanical assessment of anterior lumbar interbody fusion with an anterior lumbosacral fixation screw-plate: comparison to stand-alone anterior lumbar interbody fusion and anterior lumbar interbody fusion with pedicle screws in an unstable human cadaver model.
Gerber M; Crawford NR; Chamberlain RH; Fifield MS; LeHuec JC; Dickman CA
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2006 Apr; 31(7):762-8. PubMed ID: 16582849
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. In vitro study of biomechanical behavior of anterior and transforaminal lumbar interbody instrumentation techniques.
Niemeyer TK; Koriller M; Claes L; Kettler A; Werner K; Wilke HJ
Neurosurgery; 2006 Dec; 59(6):1271-6; discussion 1276-7. PubMed ID: 17277690
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Effect of lumbar interbody cage geometry on construct stability: a cadaveric study.
Vadapalli S; Robon M; Biyani A; Sairyo K; Khandha A; Goel VK
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2006 Sep; 31(19):2189-94. PubMed ID: 16946652
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. An in vitro biomechanical investigation: variable positioning of leopard carbon fiber interbody cages.
Quigley KJ; Alander DH; Bledsoe JG
J Spinal Disord Tech; 2008 Aug; 21(6):442-7. PubMed ID: 18679101
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Would an anatomically shaped lumbar interbody cage provide better stability? An in vitro cadaveric biomechanical evaluation.
Tsitsopoulos PP; Serhan H; Voronov LI; Carandang G; Havey RM; Ghanayem AJ; Patwardhan AG
J Spinal Disord Tech; 2012 Dec; 25(8):E240-4. PubMed ID: 22362111
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Biomechanical analysis of an expandable lateral cage and a static transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion cage with posterior instrumentation in an in vitro spondylolisthesis model.
Mantell M; Cyriac M; Haines CM; Gudipally M; O'Brien JR
J Neurosurg Spine; 2016 Jan; 24(1):32-8. PubMed ID: 26384133
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Augmentation of anterior lumbar interbody fusion with anterior pedicle screw fixation: demonstration of novel constructs and evaluation of biomechanical stability in cadaveric specimens.
Karim A; Mukherjee D; Ankem M; Gonzalez-Cruz J; Smith D; Nanda A
Neurosurgery; 2006 Mar; 58(3):522-7; discussion 522-7. PubMed ID: 16528193
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Changes in the lumbar foramen following anterior interbody fusion with tapered or cylindrical cages.
Wang M; Dalal S; Bagaria VB; McGrady LM; Rao RD
Spine J; 2007; 7(5):563-9. PubMed ID: 17905318
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. Two in vivo surgical approaches for lumbar corpectomy using allograft and a metallic implant: a controlled clinical and biomechanical study.
Huang P; Gupta MC; Sarigul-Klijn N; Hazelwood S
Spine J; 2006; 6(6):648-58. PubMed ID: 17088195
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Position of interbody spacer in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: effect on 3-dimensional stability and sagittal lumbar contour.
Faundez AA; Mehbod AA; Wu C; Wu W; Ploumis A; Transfeldt EE
J Spinal Disord Tech; 2008 May; 21(3):175-80. PubMed ID: 18458586
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. In vitro fixator rod loading after transforaminal compared to anterior lumbar interbody fusion.
Kettler A; Niemeyer T; Issler L; Merk U; Mahalingam M; Werner K; Claes L; Wilke HJ
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2006 Jun; 21(5):435-42. PubMed ID: 16442678
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Enhancing the stability of anterior lumbar interbody fusion: a biomechanical comparison of anterior plate versus posterior transpedicular instrumentation.
Tzermiadianos MN; Mekhail A; Voronov LI; Zook J; Havey RM; Renner SM; Carandang G; Abjornson C; Patwardhan AG
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2008 Jan; 33(2):E38-43. PubMed ID: 18197089
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Biomechanical comparison of instrumented posterior lumbar interbody fusion with one or two cages by finite element analysis.
Chiang MF; Zhong ZC; Chen CS; Cheng CK; Shih SL
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2006 Sep; 31(19):E682-9. PubMed ID: 16946641
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. [Biomechanical evaluation of asymmetrical posterior internal fixation for transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with transfacetopedicular screws].
Ao J; Jin AM; Zhao WD; Zhang H; Min SX; Yu B; Chen WY
Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao; 2009 May; 29(5):959-61, 965. PubMed ID: 19460720
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Unilateral and bilateral sacropelvic fixation result in similar construct biomechanics.
Tomlinson T; Chen J; Upasani V; Mahar A
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2008 Sep; 33(20):2127-33. PubMed ID: 18794753
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Effect of cage design, supplemental posterior instrumentation and approach on primary stability of a lumbar interbody fusion - A biomechanical in vitro study.
Schmoelz W; Sandriesser S; Loebl O; Bauer M; Krappinger D
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2017 Oct; 48():30-34. PubMed ID: 28719806
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
