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 *

200 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20364392)

  • 21. Five-year results of the prospective, randomized, multicenter, Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption study of the ProDisc-L total disc replacement versus circumferential arthrodesis for the treatment of single-level degenerative disc disease.
    Zigler JE; Delamarter RB
    J Neurosurg Spine; 2012 Dec; 17(6):493-501. PubMed ID: 23082846
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Lumbar total disc replacement from an extreme lateral approach: clinical experience with a minimum of 2 years' follow-up.
    Pimenta L; Oliveira L; Schaffa T; Coutinho E; Marchi L
    J Neurosurg Spine; 2011 Jan; 14(1):38-45. PubMed ID: 21166491
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. A novel lumbar total joint replacement may be an improvement over fusion for degenerative lumbar conditions: a comparative analysis of patient-reported outcomes at one year.
    Alex Sielatycki J; Devin CJ; Pennings J; Koscielski M; Metcalf T; Archer KR; Dunn R; Craig Humphreys S; Hodges S
    Spine J; 2021 May; 21(5):829-840. PubMed ID: 33346156
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Functional and radiological outcome of anterior retroperitoneal versus posterior transforaminal interbody fusion in the management of single-level lumbar degenerative disease.
    Bassani R; Morselli C; Querenghi AM; Nuara A; Sconfienza LM; Peretti GM
    Neurosurg Focus; 2020 Sep; 49(3):E2. PubMed ID: 32871567
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. A prospective, randomized, multicenter Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemptions study of lumbar total disc replacement with the CHARITE artificial disc versus lumbar fusion: part I: evaluation of clinical outcomes.
    Blumenthal S; McAfee PC; Guyer RD; Hochschuler SH; Geisler FH; Holt RT; Garcia R; Regan JJ; Ohnmeiss DD
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2005 Jul; 30(14):1565-75; discussion E387-91. PubMed ID: 16025024
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Lumbar disc arthroplasty with Maverick disc versus stand-alone interbody fusion: a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter investigational device exemption trial.
    Gornet MF; Burkus JK; Dryer RF; Peloza JH
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2011 Dec; 36(25):E1600-11. PubMed ID: 21415812
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. An 11-year minimum follow-up of the Charite III lumbar disc replacement for the treatment of symptomatic degenerative disc disease.
    Lu SB; Hai Y; Kong C; Wang QY; Su Q; Zang L; Kang N; Meng XL; Wang Y
    Eur Spine J; 2015 Sep; 24(9):2056-64. PubMed ID: 25895882
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Comparison of one versus two cages in lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar spinal disease: a meta-analysis.
    Liu J; Tang J; Liu H
    Orthop Surg; 2014 Aug; 6(3):236-43. PubMed ID: 25179359
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. 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]  

  • 30. 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]  

  • 31. Total disc replacement compared to lumbar fusion: a randomised controlled trial with 2-year follow-up.
    Berg S; Tullberg T; Branth B; Olerud C; Tropp H
    Eur Spine J; 2009 Oct; 18(10):1512-9. PubMed ID: 19506919
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. The effect of a mismatched center of rotation on the clinical outcomes and flexion-extension range of motion: lumbar total disk replacement using mobidisc at a 5.5-year follow-up.
    Lee CS; Lee DH; Hwang CJ; Kim H; Noh H
    J Spinal Disord Tech; 2014 May; 27(3):148-53. PubMed ID: 22525508
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Evaluation of Aesculap Implant Systems activl Artificial Disc for the treatment of degenerative disc disease.
    Shein D; Shue J; Girardi F
    Expert Rev Med Devices; 2016 Dec; 13(12):1069-1072. PubMed ID: 27807981
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Cost effectiveness of disc prosthesis versus lumbar fusion in patients with chronic low back pain: randomized controlled trial with 2-year follow-up.
    Fritzell P; Berg S; Borgström F; Tullberg T; Tropp H
    Eur Spine J; 2011 Jul; 20(7):1001-11. PubMed ID: 21053028
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Prospective, randomized, multicenter Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption study of the ProDisc-L total disc replacement compared with circumferential arthrodesis for the treatment of two-level lumbar degenerative disc disease: results at twenty-four months.
    Delamarter R; Zigler JE; Balderston RA; Cammisa FP; Goldstein JA; Spivak JM
    J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2011 Apr; 93(8):705-15. PubMed ID: 21398574
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Cervical total disc replacement with the Mobi-C cervical artificial disc compared with anterior discectomy and fusion for treatment of 2-level symptomatic degenerative disc disease: a prospective, randomized, controlled multicenter clinical trial: clinical article.
    Davis RJ; Kim KD; Hisey MS; Hoffman GA; Bae HW; Gaede SE; Rashbaum RF; Nunley PD; Peterson DL; Stokes JK
    J Neurosurg Spine; 2013 Nov; 19(5):532-45. PubMed ID: 24010901
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. A systematic review and meta-analysis of outcomes in hybrid constructs for multi-level lumbar degenerative disc disease.
    Lackey A; Phan K; Mobbs R
    J Clin Neurosci; 2016 Dec; 34():23-29. PubMed ID: 27475322
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Clinical outcome of lumbar total disc replacement using ProDisc-L in degenerative disc disease: minimum 5-year follow-up results at a single institute.
    Park CK; Ryu KS; Lee KY; Lee HJ
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2012 Apr; 37(8):672-7. PubMed ID: 21857395
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Effect of total lumbar disc replacement on lumbosacral lordosis.
    Kasliwal MK; Deutsch H
    J Spinal Disord Tech; 2012 Oct; 25(7):370-3. PubMed ID: 21738074
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Total disc replacement versus multidisciplinary rehabilitation in patients with chronic low back pain and degenerative discs: 8-year follow-up of a randomized controlled multicenter trial.
    Furunes H; Storheim K; Brox JI; Johnsen LG; Skouen JS; Franssen E; Solberg TK; Sandvik L; Hellum C
    Spine J; 2017 Oct; 17(10):1480-1488. PubMed ID: 28583869
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.