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.
229 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20195194)
1. National revision burden for lumbar total disc replacement in the United States: epidemiologic and economic perspectives. Kurtz SM; Lau E; Ianuzzi A; Schmier J; Todd L; Isaza J; Albert TJ Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2010 Mar; 35(6):690-6. PubMed ID: 20195194 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparative charge analysis of one- and two-level lumbar total disc arthroplasty versus circumferential lumbar fusion. Levin DA; Bendo JA; Quirno M; Errico T; Goldstein J; Spivak J Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2007 Dec; 32(25):2905-9. PubMed ID: 18246016 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparison between cervical total disc replacement and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion of 1 to 2 levels from 2002 to 2009. Nandyala SV; Marquez-Lara A; Fineberg SJ; Singh K Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2014 Jan; 39(1):53-7. PubMed ID: 24108292 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Acute hospital costs after minimally invasive versus open lumbar interbody fusion: data from a US national database with 6106 patients. Wang MY; Lerner J; Lesko J; McGirt MJ J Spinal Disord Tech; 2012 Aug; 25(6):324-8. PubMed ID: 21685806 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparison of revision surgeries for one- to two-level cervical TDR and ACDF from 2002 to 2011. Nandyala SV; Marquez-Lara A; Fineberg SJ; Singh K Spine J; 2014 Dec; 14(12):2841-6. PubMed ID: 24704499 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. An economic model of one-level lumbar arthroplasty versus fusion. Guyer RD; Tromanhauser SG; Regan JJ Spine J; 2007; 7(5):558-62. PubMed ID: 17588819 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. National trends in the surgical treatment for lumbar degenerative disc disease: United States, 2000 to 2009. Yoshihara H; Yoneoka D Spine J; 2015 Feb; 15(2):265-71. PubMed ID: 25281920 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Lumbar spinal fusion versus anterior lumbar disc replacement: the financial implications. Patel VV; Estes S; Lindley EM; Burger E J Spinal Disord Tech; 2008 Oct; 21(7):473-6. PubMed ID: 18836357 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Epidemiological trends in the utilization of bone morphogenetic protein in spinal fusions from 2002 to 2011. Singh K; Nandyala SV; Marquez-Lara A; Fineberg SJ Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2014 Mar; 39(6):491-6. PubMed ID: 24365905 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Inpatient Outcomes and Postoperative Complications After Primary Versus Revision Lumbar Spinal Fusion Surgeries for Degenerative Lumbar Disc Disease: A National (Nationwide) Inpatient Sample Analysis, 2002-2011. Kalakoti P; Missios S; Maiti T; Konar S; Bir S; Bollam P; Nanda A World Neurosurg; 2016 Jan; 85():114-24. PubMed ID: 26319189 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Prevalence of lumbar total disc replacement candidates in a community-based spinal surgery practice. Fras CI; Auerbach JD J Spinal Disord Tech; 2008 Apr; 21(2):126-9. PubMed ID: 18391718 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparison of complications, costs, and length of stay of three different lumbar interbody fusion techniques: an analysis of the Nationwide Inpatient Sample database. Goz V; Weinreb JH; Schwab F; Lafage V; Errico TJ Spine J; 2014 Sep; 14(9):2019-27. PubMed ID: 24333459 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Trends in resource utilization and rate of cervical disc arthroplasty and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion throughout the United States from 2006 to 2013. Saifi C; Fein AW; Cazzulino A; Lehman RA; Phillips FM; An HS; Riew KD Spine J; 2018 Jun; 18(6):1022-1029. PubMed ID: 29128581 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Seven-year cost-effectiveness of ProDisc-C total disc replacement: results from investigational device exemption and post-approval studies. Radcliff K; Lerner J; Yang C; Bernard T; Zigler JE J Neurosurg Spine; 2016 May; 24(5):760-8. PubMed ID: 26824587 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Risk factors for reoperation after lumbar total disc replacement at short-, mid-, and long-term follow-up. Perfetti DC; Galina JM; Derman PB; Guyer RD; Ohnmeiss DD; Satin AM Spine J; 2021 Jul; 21(7):1110-1117. PubMed ID: 33640583 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Epidemiology of indications and contraindications to total disc replacement in an academic practice. Chin KR Spine J; 2007; 7(4):392-8. PubMed ID: 17630136 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Complications after lumbar spine surgery between teaching and nonteaching hospitals. Nandyala SV; Marquez-Lara A; Fineberg SJ; Hassanzadeh H; Singh K Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2014 Mar; 39(5):417-23. PubMed ID: 24573073 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Is Total Disk Replacement a Cost-effective Treatment for Cervical Degenerative Disk Disease? Wiedenhöfer B; Nacke J; Stephan M; Richter W; Carstens C; Eichler M Clin Spine Surg; 2017 Jun; 30(5):E530-E534. PubMed ID: 28525473 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion versus cervical disc arthroplasty: current state and trends in treatment for cervical disc pathology. Nesterenko SO; Riley LH; Skolasky RL Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2012 Aug; 37(17):1470-4. PubMed ID: 22343278 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Factors affecting reoperations after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion within and outside of a Federal Drug Administration investigational device exemption cervical disc replacement trial. Singh K; Phillips FM; Park DK; Pelton MA; An HS; Goldberg EJ Spine J; 2012 May; 12(5):372-8. PubMed ID: 22425784 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]