129 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20869326)
1. Total disc arthroplasty does not affect the incidence of adjacent segment degeneration in cervical spine: results of 93 patients in three prospective randomized clinical trials.
Jawahar A; Cavanaugh DA; Kerr EJ; Birdsong EM; Nunley PD
Spine J; 2010 Dec; 10(12):1043-8. PubMed ID: 20869326
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Adjacent segment motion after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion versus Prodisc-c cervical total disk arthroplasty: analysis from a randomized, controlled trial.
Kelly MP; Mok JM; Frisch RF; Tay BK
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2011 Jul; 36(15):1171-9. PubMed ID: 21217449
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Clinical outcomes of Bryan cervical disc arthroplasty a prospective, randomized, controlled, single site trial with 48-month follow-up.
Garrido BJ; Taha TA; Sasso RC
J Spinal Disord Tech; 2010 Aug; 23(6):367-71. PubMed ID: 20087223
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Artificial disc versus fusion: a prospective, randomized study with 2-year follow-up on 99 patients.
Sasso RC; Smucker JD; Hacker RJ; Heller JG
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2007 Dec; 32(26):2933-40; discussion 2941-2. PubMed ID: 18091483
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Results of the prospective, randomized, controlled multicenter Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption study of the ProDisc-C total disc replacement versus anterior discectomy and fusion for the treatment of 1-level symptomatic cervical disc disease.
Murrey D; Janssen M; Delamarter R; Goldstein J; Zigler J; Tay B; Darden B
Spine J; 2009 Apr; 9(4):275-86. PubMed ID: 18774751
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Comparison of adverse events between the Bryan artificial cervical disc and anterior cervical arthrodesis.
Anderson PA; Sasso RC; Riew KD
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2008 May; 33(12):1305-12. PubMed ID: 18496341
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Anterior cervical decompression and fusion accelerates adjacent segment degeneration: comparison with asymptomatic volunteers in a ten-year magnetic resonance imaging follow-up study.
Matsumoto M; Okada E; Ichihara D; Watanabe K; Chiba K; Toyama Y; Fujiwara H; Momoshima S; Nishiwaki Y; Iwanami A; Ikegami T; Takahata T; Hashimoto T
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2010 Jan; 35(1):36-43. PubMed ID: 20023606
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Clinical and radiographic results of cervical artificial disc arthroplasty: over three years follow-up cohort study.
Tian W; Han X; Liu B; Li Q; Hu L; Li ZY; Yuan Q; He D; Xing YG
Chin Med J (Engl); 2010 Nov; 123(21):2969-73. PubMed ID: 21162939
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Lower incidence of dysphagia with cervical arthroplasty compared with ACDF in a prospective randomized clinical trial.
McAfee PC; Cappuccino A; Cunningham BW; Devine JG; Phillips FM; Regan JJ; Albert TJ; Ahrens JE
J Spinal Disord Tech; 2010 Feb; 23(1):1-8. PubMed ID: 20051917
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Factors affecting the incidence of symptomatic adjacent-level disease in cervical spine after total disc arthroplasty: 2- to 4-year follow-up of 3 prospective randomized trials.
Nunley PD; Jawahar A; Kerr EJ; Gordon CJ; Cavanaugh DA; Birdsong EM; Stocks M; Danielson G
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2012 Mar; 37(6):445-51. PubMed ID: 21587111
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Early follow-up outcomes after treatment of degenerative disc disease with the discover cervical disc prosthesis.
Du J; Li M; Liu H; Meng H; He Q; Luo Z
Spine J; 2011 Apr; 11(4):281-9. PubMed ID: 21377939
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Clinical outcomes of BRYAN cervical disc arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter trial with 24-month follow-up.
Sasso RC; Smucker JD; Hacker RJ; Heller JG
J Spinal Disord Tech; 2007 Oct; 20(7):481-91. PubMed ID: 17912124
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Cervical disc arthroplasty: general introduction.
Acosta FL; Ames CP
Neurosurg Clin N Am; 2005 Oct; 16(4):603-7, vi. PubMed ID: 16326283
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Symptomatic adjacent segment disease after cervical total disc replacement: re-examining the clinical and radiological evidence with established criteria.
Nunley PD; Jawahar A; Cavanaugh DA; Gordon CR; Kerr EJ; Utter PA
Spine J; 2013 Jan; 13(1):5-12. PubMed ID: 23318108
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Motion analysis of bryan cervical disc arthroplasty versus anterior discectomy and fusion: results from a prospective, randomized, multicenter, clinical trial.
Sasso RC; Best NM; Metcalf NH; Anderson PA
J Spinal Disord Tech; 2008 Aug; 21(6):393-9. PubMed ID: 18679092
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Effect of adverse events on low back surgery outcome: twenty-four-month follow-up results from a Food And Drug Administration investigational device exemptiontrial.
Ohnmeiss DD; Bodemer W; Zigler JE
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2010 Apr; 35(7):835-8. PubMed ID: 20195215
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. A retrospective analysis of patient perceived outcomes in patients 55 years and older undergoing anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.
Gray MJ; Biyani A; Smith A
J Spinal Disord Tech; 2010 May; 23(3):157-61. PubMed ID: 20072034
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Relaxation of forces needed to distract cervical vertebrae after discectomy: a biomechanical study.
Aryan HE; Newman CB; Lu DC; Hu SS; Tay BK; Bradford DS; Puttlitz CM; Ames CP
J Spinal Disord Tech; 2009 Apr; 22(2):100-4. PubMed ID: 19342931
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. [Clinical outcomes of single level Bryan cervical disc arthroplasty: a prospective controlled study].
Wang Y; Cai B; Zhang XS; Xiao SH; Wang Z; Lu N; Chai W; Zheng GQ
Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi; 2008 Mar; 46(5):328-32. PubMed ID: 18785525
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Adjacent segment disease after anterior cervical interbody fusion.
Ishihara H; Kanamori M; Kawaguchi Y; Nakamura H; Kimura T
Spine J; 2004; 4(6):624-8. PubMed ID: 15541693
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
