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 *

844 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22120269)

  • 1. Cost-effectiveness of minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative spondylolisthesis associated low-back and leg pain over two years.
    Parker SL; Adogwa O; Bydon A; Cheng J; McGirt MJ
    World Neurosurg; 2012 Jul; 78(1-2):178-84. PubMed ID: 22120269
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative spondylolisthesis: comparative effectiveness and cost-utility analysis.
    Parker SL; Mendenhall SK; Shau DN; Zuckerman SL; Godil SS; Cheng JS; McGirt MJ
    World Neurosurg; 2014; 82(1-2):230-8. PubMed ID: 23321379
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Comparative effectiveness of minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: 2-year assessment of narcotic use, return to work, disability, and quality of life.
    Adogwa O; Parker SL; Bydon A; Cheng J; McGirt MJ
    J Spinal Disord Tech; 2011 Dec; 24(8):479-84. PubMed ID: 21336176
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Cost-effectiveness of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for Grade I degenerative spondylolisthesis.
    Adogwa O; Parker SL; Davis BJ; Aaronson O; Devin C; Cheng JS; McGirt MJ
    J Neurosurg Spine; 2011 Aug; 15(2):138-43. PubMed ID: 21529203
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Cost-utility analysis of minimally invasive versus open multilevel hemilaminectomy for lumbar stenosis.
    Parker SL; Adogwa O; Davis BJ; Fulchiero E; Aaronson O; Cheng J; Devin CJ; McGirt MJ
    J Spinal Disord Tech; 2013 Feb; 26(1):42-7. PubMed ID: 21959840
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Modeled cost-effectiveness of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion compared with posterolateral fusion for spondylolisthesis using N(2)QOD data.
    Carreon LY; Glassman SD; Ghogawala Z; Mummaneni PV; McGirt MJ; Asher AL
    J Neurosurg Spine; 2016 Jun; 24(6):916-21. PubMed ID: 26895529
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A perioperative cost analysis comparing single-level minimally invasive and open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.
    Singh K; Nandyala SV; Marquez-Lara A; Fineberg SJ; Oglesby M; Pelton MA; Andersson GB; Isayeva D; Jegier BJ; Phillips FM
    Spine J; 2014 Aug; 14(8):1694-701. PubMed ID: 24252237
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A prospective, multi-institutional comparative effectiveness study of lumbar spine surgery in morbidly obese patients: does minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion result in superior outcomes?
    Adogwa O; Carr K; Thompson P; Hoang K; Darlington T; Perez E; Fatemi P; Gottfried O; Cheng J; Isaacs RE
    World Neurosurg; 2015 May; 83(5):860-6. PubMed ID: 25535070
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Minimally invasive versus open fusion for Grade I degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: analysis of the Quality Outcomes Database.
    Mummaneni PV; Bisson EF; Kerezoudis P; Glassman S; Foley K; Slotkin JR; Potts E; Shaffrey M; Shaffrey CI; Coric D; Knightly J; Park P; Fu KM; Devin CJ; Chotai S; Chan AK; Virk M; Asher AL; Bydon M
    Neurosurg Focus; 2017 Aug; 43(2):E11. PubMed ID: 28760035
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A comparison of perioperative costs and outcomes in patients with and without workers' compensation claims treated with minimally invasive or open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.
    Pelton MA; Phillips FM; Singh K
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2012 Oct; 37(22):1914-9. PubMed ID: 22487713
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A Cost-Effectiveness Comparison Between Open Transforaminal and Minimally Invasive Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusions Using the Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio at 2-Year Follow-up.
    Gandhoke GS; Shin HM; Chang YF; Tempel Z; Gerszten PC; Okonkwo DO; Kanter AS
    Neurosurgery; 2016 Apr; 78(4):585-95. PubMed ID: 26726969
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A protocol of a randomized controlled multicenter trial for surgical treatment of lumbar spondylolisthesis: the Lumbar Interbody Fusion Trial (LIFT).
    de Kunder SL; Rijkers K; van Kuijk SM; Evers SM; de Bie RA; van Santbrink H
    BMC Musculoskelet Disord; 2016 Oct; 17(1):417. PubMed ID: 27716168
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Cost-effectiveness of multilevel hemilaminectomy for lumbar stenosis-associated radiculopathy.
    Parker SL; Fulchiero EC; Davis BJ; Adogwa O; Aaronson OS; Cheng JS; Devin CJ; McGirt MJ
    Spine J; 2011 Aug; 11(8):705-11. PubMed ID: 21641874
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A comparison of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and decompression alone for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis.
    Chan AK; Bisson EF; Bydon M; Glassman SD; Foley KT; Potts EA; Shaffrey CI; Shaffrey ME; Coric D; Knightly JJ; Park P; Wang MY; Fu KM; Slotkin JR; Asher AL; Virk MS; Kerezoudis P; Alvi MA; Guan J; Haid RW; Mummaneni PV
    Neurosurg Focus; 2019 May; 46(5):E13. PubMed ID: 31042655
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The cost-effectiveness of interbody fusions versus posterolateral fusions in 137 patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis.
    Bydon M; Macki M; Abt NB; Witham TF; Wolinsky JP; Gokaslan ZL; Bydon A; Sciubba DM
    Spine J; 2015 Mar; 15(3):492-8. PubMed ID: 25463402
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Cost-effectiveness of lumbar discectomy and single-level fusion for spondylolisthesis: experience with the NeuroPoint-SD registry.
    Mummaneni PV; Whitmore RG; Curran JN; Ziewacz JE; Wadhwa R; Shaffrey CI; Asher AL; Heary RF; Cheng JS; Hurlbert RJ; Douglas AF; Smith JS; Malhotra NR; Dante SJ; Magge SN; Kaiser MG; Abbed KM; Resnick DK; Ghogawala Z
    Neurosurg Focus; 2014 Jun; 36(6):E3. PubMed ID: 24881635
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for grade I lumbar spondylolisthesis: 5-year follow-up from the prospective multicenter Quality Outcomes Database registry.
    Chan AK; Bydon M; Bisson EF; Glassman SD; Foley KT; Shaffrey CI; Potts EA; Shaffrey ME; Coric D; Knightly JJ; Park P; Wang MY; Fu KM; Slotkin JR; Asher AL; Virk MS; Michalopoulos GD; Guan J; Haid RW; Agarwal N; Park C; Chou D; Mummaneni PV
    Neurosurg Focus; 2023 Jan; 54(1):E2. PubMed ID: 36587409
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Cost-effectiveness of circumferential fusion for lumbar spondylolisthesis: propensity-matched comparison of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with anterior-posterior fusion.
    Jazini E; Gum JL; Glassman SD; Crawford CH; Djurasovic M; Owens RK; Dimar JR; McGraw KE; Carreon LY
    Spine J; 2018 Nov; 18(11):1969-1973. PubMed ID: 29705337
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A retrospective review comparing two-year patient-reported outcomes, costs, and healthcare resource utilization for TLIF vs. PLF for single-level degenerative spondylolisthesis.
    Kim E; Chotai S; Stonko D; Wick J; Sielatycki A; Devin CJ
    Eur Spine J; 2018 Mar; 27(3):661-669. PubMed ID: 28585094
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. A Comparison of Minimally Invasive and Open Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Grade 1 Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: An Analysis of the Prospective Quality Outcomes Database.
    Chan AK; Bisson EF; Bydon M; Foley KT; Glassman SD; Shaffrey CI; Wang MY; Park P; Potts EA; Shaffrey ME; Coric D; Knightly JJ; Fu KM; Slotkin JR; Asher AL; Virk MS; Kerezoudis P; Alvi MA; Guan J; Haid RW; Mummaneni PV
    Neurosurgery; 2020 Sep; 87(3):555-562. PubMed ID: 32409828
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 43.