2260 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20362252)
1. Biomechanical comparison of single- and two-level cervical arthroplasty versus arthrodesis: effect on adjacent-level spinal kinematics.
Cunningham BW; Hu N; Zorn CM; McAfee PC
Spine J; 2010 Apr; 10(4):341-9. PubMed ID: 20362252
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. Stabilizing potential of anterior, posterior, and circumferential fixation for multilevel cervical arthrodesis: an in vitro human cadaveric study of the operative and adjacent segment kinematics.
Dmitriev AE; Kuklo TR; Lehman RA; Rosner MK
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2007 Mar; 32(6):E188-96. PubMed ID: 17413459
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Adjacent-level range of motion and intradiscal pressure after posterior cervical decompression and fixation: an in vitro human cadaveric model.
Kretzer RM; Hsu W; Hu N; Umekoji H; Jallo GI; McAfee PC; Tortolani PJ; Cunningham BW
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2012 Jun; 37(13):E778-85. PubMed ID: 22228326
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Effect of two-level total disc replacement on cervical spine kinematics.
Phillips FM; Tzermiadianos MN; Voronov LI; Havey RM; Carandang G; Dooris A; Patwardhan AG
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2009 Oct; 34(22):E794-9. PubMed ID: 19829242
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Cervical disc replacement-porous coated motion prosthesis: a comparative biomechanical analysis showing the key role of the posterior longitudinal ligament.
McAfee PC; Cunningham B; Dmitriev A; Hu N; Woo Kim S; Cappuccino A; Pimenta L
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2003 Oct; 28(20):S176-85. PubMed ID: 14560189
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Disc replacement adjacent to cervical fusion: a biomechanical comparison of hybrid construct versus two-level fusion.
Lee MJ; Dumonski M; Phillips FM; Voronov LI; Renner SM; Carandang G; Havey RM; Patwardhan AG
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2011 Nov; 36(23):1932-9. PubMed ID: 21289581
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Adjacent level intradiscal pressure and segmental kinematics following a cervical total disc arthroplasty: an in vitro human cadaveric model.
Dmitriev AE; Cunningham BW; Hu N; Sell G; Vigna F; McAfee PC
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2005 May; 30(10):1165-72. PubMed ID: 15897831
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The effect of spinal instrumentation on kinematics at the cervicothoracic junction: emphasis on soft-tissue response in an in vitro human cadaveric model.
Kretzer RM; Hu N; Umekoji H; Sciubba DM; Jallo GI; McAfee PC; Tortolani PJ; Cunningham BW
J Neurosurg Spine; 2010 Oct; 13(4):435-42. PubMed ID: 20887140
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Cervical kinematics after fusion and bryan disc arthroplasty.
Sasso RC; Best NM
J Spinal Disord Tech; 2008 Feb; 21(1):19-22. PubMed ID: 18418131
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Effect of multilevel lumbar disc arthroplasty on the operative- and adjacent-level kinematics and intradiscal pressures: an in vitro human cadaveric assessment.
Dmitriev AE; Gill NW; Kuklo TR; Rosner MK
Spine J; 2008; 8(6):918-25. PubMed ID: 18178528
[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. Biomechanical analysis of disc pressure and facet contact force after simulated two-level cervical surgeries (fusion and arthroplasty) and hybrid surgery.
Park J; Shin JJ; Lim J
World Neurosurg; 2014 Dec; 82(6):1388-93. PubMed ID: 24937596
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. Biomechanical comparison of adjacent segmental motion after ventral cervical fixation with varying angles of lordosis.
Hwang SH; Kayanja M; Milks RA; Benzel EC
Spine J; 2007; 7(2):216-21. PubMed ID: 17321972
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Biomechanical evaluation of occipitocervicothoracic fusion: impact of partial or sequential fixation.
Cheng BC; Hafez MA; Cunningham B; Serhan H; Welch WC
Spine J; 2008; 8(5):821-6. PubMed ID: 17981098
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Motion response of a polycrystalline diamond adaptive axis of rotation cervical total disc arthroplasty.
Havey RM; Khayatzadeh S; Voronov LI; Blank KR; Carandang G; Harding DP; Patwardhan AG
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2019 Feb; 62():34-41. PubMed ID: 30665037
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Biomechanical evaluation of a novel total cervical prosthesis in a single-level cervical subtotal corpectomy model: an in vitro human cadaveric study.
Wu ZX; Han BJ; Zhao X; Kong L; Liu D; Cui G; Lei W
J Surg Res; 2012 Jun; 175(1):76-81. PubMed ID: 21492873
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Biomechanical consideration of prosthesis selection in hybrid surgery for bi-level cervical disc degenerative diseases.
Mo Z; Li Q; Jia Z; Yang J; Wong DW; Fan Y
Eur Spine J; 2017 Apr; 26(4):1181-1190. PubMed ID: 27652678
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
