These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

628 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19121822)

  • 1. Influence of different artificial disc kinematics on spine biomechanics.
    Zander T; Rohlmann A; Bergmann G
    Clin Biomech (Bristol); 2009 Feb; 24(2):135-42. PubMed ID: 19121822
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Disc arthroplasty design influences intervertebral kinematics and facet forces.
    Rousseau MA; Bradford DS; Bertagnoli R; Hu SS; Lotz JC
    Spine J; 2006; 6(3):258-66. PubMed ID: 16651219
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. Biomechanical effect of constraint in lumbar total disc replacement: a study with finite element analysis.
    Chung SK; Kim YE; Wang KC
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2009 May; 34(12):1281-6. PubMed ID: 19455003
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Biomechanical evaluation of total disc replacement arthroplasty: an in vitro human cadaveric model.
    Cunningham BW; Gordon JD; Dmitriev AE; Hu N; McAfee PC
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2003 Oct; 28(20):S110-7. PubMed ID: 14560182
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Stress analysis of the interface between cervical vertebrae end plates and the Bryan, Prestige LP, and ProDisc-C cervical disc prostheses: an in vivo image-based finite element study.
    Lin CY; Kang H; Rouleau JP; Hollister SJ; Marca FL
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2009 Jul; 34(15):1554-60. PubMed ID: 19564765
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Total disc replacement positioning affects facet contact forces and vertebral body strains.
    Rundell SA; Auerbach JD; Balderston RA; Kurtz SM
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2008 Nov; 33(23):2510-7. PubMed ID: 18978591
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Biomechanics of two-level Charité artificial disc placement in comparison to fusion plus single-level disc placement combination.
    Grauer JN; Biyani A; Faizan A; Kiapour A; Sairyo K; Ivanov A; Ebraheim NA; Patel TCh; Goel VK
    Spine J; 2006; 6(6):659-66. PubMed ID: 17088196
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Effect of an interspinous implant on loads in the lumbar spine.
    Rohlmann A; Zander T; Burra NK; Bergmann G
    Biomed Tech (Berl); 2005 Oct; 50(10):343-7. PubMed ID: 16300050
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Influence of the geometry of a ball-and-socket intervertebral prosthesis at the cervical spine: a finite element study.
    Rousseau MA; Bonnet X; Skalli W
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2008 Jan; 33(1):E10-4. PubMed ID: 18165735
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Effects of fusion-bone stiffness on the mechanical behavior of the lumbar spine after vertebral body replacement.
    Rohlmann A; Zander T; Bergmann G
    Clin Biomech (Bristol); 2006 Mar; 21(3):221-7. PubMed ID: 16356613
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Internal and external responses of anterior lumbar/lumbosacral fusion: nonlinear finite element analysis.
    Guan Y; Yoganandan N; Maiman DJ; Pintar FA
    J Spinal Disord Tech; 2008 Jun; 21(4):299-304. PubMed ID: 18525492
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Effect of an artificial disc on lumbar spine biomechanics: a probabilistic finite element study.
    Rohlmann A; Mann A; Zander T; Bergmann G
    Eur Spine J; 2009 Jan; 18(1):89-97. PubMed ID: 19043744
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A biomimetic artificial intervertebral disc system composed of a cubic three-dimensional fabric.
    Shikinami Y; Kawabe Y; Yasukawa K; Tsuta K; Kotani Y; Abumi K
    Spine J; 2010 Feb; 10(2):141-52. PubMed ID: 19944651
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Revision strategies for single- and two-level total disc arthroplasty procedures: a biomechanical perspective.
    Cunningham BW; Hu N; Beatson HJ; Serhan H; Sefter JC; McAfee PC
    Spine J; 2009 Sep; 9(9):735-43. PubMed ID: 19477694
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Comparison of the effects of bilateral posterior dynamic and rigid fixation devices on the loads in the lumbar spine: a finite element analysis.
    Rohlmann A; Burra NK; Zander T; Bergmann G
    Eur Spine J; 2007 Aug; 16(8):1223-31. PubMed ID: 17206401
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Biomechanical comparison between lumbar disc arthroplasty and fusion.
    Chen SH; Zhong ZC; Chen CS; Chen WJ; Hung C
    Med Eng Phys; 2009 Mar; 31(2):244-53. PubMed ID: 18760654
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Effect of a pedicle-screw-based motion preservation system on lumbar spine biomechanics: a probabilistic finite element study with subsequent sensitivity analysis.
    Rohlmann A; Nabil Boustani H; Bergmann G; Zander T
    J Biomech; 2010 Nov; 43(15):2963-9. PubMed ID: 20696430
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Response of Charité total disc replacement under physiologic loads: prosthesis component motion patterns.
    O'Leary P; Nicolakis M; Lorenz MA; Voronov LI; Zindrick MR; Ghanayem A; Havey RM; Carandang G; Sartori M; Gaitanis IN; Fronczak S; Patwardhan AG
    Spine J; 2005; 5(6):590-9. PubMed ID: 16291097
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 32.