223 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22673487)
1. mild Interlaminar decompression for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis: procedure description and case series with 1-year follow-up.
Wong WH
Clin J Pain; 2012 Jul; 28(6):534-8. PubMed ID: 22673487
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Long-term results of percutaneous lumbar decompression mild(®) for spinal stenosis.
Mekhail N; Vallejo R; Coleman MH; Benyamin RM
Pain Pract; 2012 Mar; 12(3):184-93. PubMed ID: 21676166
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Minimally invasive lumbar spinal decompression in the elderly: outcomes of 50 patients aged 75 years and older.
Rosen DS; O'Toole JE; Eichholz KM; Hrubes M; Huo D; Sandhu FA; Fessler RG
Neurosurgery; 2007 Mar; 60(3):503-9; discussion 509-10. PubMed ID: 17327795
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Functional and patient-reported outcomes in symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis following percutaneous decompression.
Mekhail N; Costandi S; Abraham B; Samuel SW
Pain Pract; 2012 Jul; 12(6):417-25. PubMed ID: 22651852
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Midterm outcome after microendoscopic decompressive laminotomy for lumbar spinal stenosis: 4-year prospective study.
Castro-Menéndez M; Bravo-Ricoy JA; Casal-Moro R; Hernández-Blanco M; Jorge-Barreiro FJ
Neurosurgery; 2009 Jul; 65(1):100-10; discussion 110; quiz A12. PubMed ID: 19574831
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Minimally invasive laminectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis in patients with and without preoperative spondylolisthesis: clinical outcome and reoperation rates.
Alimi M; Hofstetter CP; Pyo SY; Paulo D; Härtl R
J Neurosurg Spine; 2015 Apr; 22(4):339-52. PubMed ID: 25635635
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. [Step treatment strategy of degenerative lumbar scoliosis and spinal stenosis].
Zhang Z; Ren D; Sun T; Li F; Guan K; Zhao G; Shan J
Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi; 2011 Aug; 25(8):951-5. PubMed ID: 21923023
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Muscle-preserving interlaminar decompression for the lumbar spine: a minimally invasive new procedure for lumbar spinal canal stenosis.
Hatta Y; Shiraishi T; Sakamoto A; Yato Y; Harada T; Mikami Y; Hase H; Kubo T
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2009 Apr; 34(8):E276-80. PubMed ID: 19365236
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Bilateral interlaminar fenestration and unroofing for the decompression of nerve roots by using a unilateral approach in lumbar canal stenosis.
Iwatsuki K; Yoshimine T; Aoki M
Surg Neurol; 2007 Nov; 68(5):487-92; discussion 492. PubMed ID: 17825382
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. MiDAS I (mild Decompression Alternative to Open Surgery): a preliminary report of a prospective, multi-center clinical study.
Chopko B; Caraway DL
Pain Physician; 2010; 13(4):369-78. PubMed ID: 20648206
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Microendoscopy-assisted muscle-preserving interlaminar decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis: clinical results of consecutive 105 cases with more than 3-year follow-up.
Yoshimoto M; Miyakawa T; Takebayashi T; Ida K; Tanimoto K; Kawamura S; Yamashita T
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2014 Mar; 39(5):E318-25. PubMed ID: 24365896
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A prospective comparative study of 2 minimally invasive decompression procedures for lumbar spinal canal stenosis: unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression (ULBD) versus muscle-preserving interlaminar decompression (MILD).
Arai Y; Hirai T; Yoshii T; Sakai K; Kato T; Enomoto M; Matsumoto R; Yamada T; Kawabata S; Shinomiya K; Okawa A
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2014 Feb; 39(4):332-40. PubMed ID: 24299721
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Long-term results of percutaneous lumbar decompression for LSS: two-year outcomes.
Chopko BW
Clin J Pain; 2013 Nov; 29(11):939-43. PubMed ID: 23446067
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Evaluation of indirect decompression of the lumbar spinal canal following minimally invasive lateral transpsoas interbody fusion: radiographic and outcome analysis.
Elowitz EH; Yanni DS; Chwajol M; Starke RM; Perin NI
Minim Invasive Neurosurg; 2011 Oct; 54(5-6):201-6. PubMed ID: 22278781
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Study of percutaneous lumbar decompression and treatment algorithm for patients suffering from neurogenic claudication.
Deer TR; Kim CK; Bowman RG; Ranson MT; Yee BS
Pain Physician; 2012; 15(6):451-60. PubMed ID: 23159960
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Aperius interspinous implant versus open surgical decompression in lumbar spinal stenosis.
Postacchini R; Ferrari E; Cinotti G; Menchetti PP; Postacchini F
Spine J; 2011 Oct; 11(10):933-9. PubMed ID: 22005077
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Modified Marmot operation versus spinous process transverse cutting laminectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis.
Kawakami M; Nakao S; Fukui D; Kadosaka Y; Matsuoka T; Yamada H
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2013 Nov; 38(23):E1461-8. PubMed ID: 23778375
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Systematic safety review and meta-analysis of procedural experience using percutaneous access to treat symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis.
Levy RM; Deer TR
Pain Med; 2012 Dec; 13(12):1554-61. PubMed ID: 23136978
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Micro-decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis: the early outcome using a modified surgical technique.
Orpen NM; Corner JA; Shetty RR; Marshall R
J Bone Joint Surg Br; 2010 Apr; 92(4):550-4. PubMed ID: 20357333
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. New image-guided ultra-minimally invasive lumbar decompression method: the mild procedure.
Deer TR; Kapural L
Pain Physician; 2010; 13(1):35-41. PubMed ID: 20119461
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
