375 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22801456)
1. PEEK Versus Ti Interbody Fusion Devices: Resultant Fusion, Bone Apposition, Initial and 26-Week Biomechanics.
Pelletier MH; Cordaro N; Punjabi VM; Waites M; Lau A; Walsh WR
Clin Spine Surg; 2016 May; 29(4):E208-14. PubMed ID: 22801456
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Biomechanical rationale for using polyetheretherketone (PEEK) spacers for lumbar interbody fusion-A finite element study.
Vadapalli S; Sairyo K; Goel VK; Robon M; Biyani A; Khandha A; Ebraheim NA
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2006 Dec; 31(26):E992-8. PubMed ID: 17172990
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Host bone response to polyetheretherketone versus porous tantalum implants for cervical spinal fusion in a goat model.
Sinclair SK; Konz GJ; Dawson JM; Epperson RT; Bloebaum RD
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2012 May; 37(10):E571-80. PubMed ID: 22146277
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Porous titanium-6 aluminum-4 vanadium cage has better osseointegration and less micromotion than a poly-ether-ether-ketone cage in sheep vertebral fusion.
Wu SH; Li Y; Zhang YQ; Li XK; Yuan CF; Hao YL; Zhang ZY; Guo Z
Artif Organs; 2013 Dec; 37(12):E191-201. PubMed ID: 24147953
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Bony ingrowth potential of 3D-printed porous titanium alloy: a direct comparison of interbody cage materials in an in vivo ovine lumbar fusion model.
McGilvray KC; Easley J; Seim HB; Regan D; Berven SH; Hsu WK; Mroz TE; Puttlitz CM
Spine J; 2018 Jul; 18(7):1250-1260. PubMed ID: 29496624
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Does PEEK/HA Enhance Bone Formation Compared With PEEK in a Sheep Cervical Fusion Model?
Walsh WR; Pelletier MH; Bertollo N; Christou C; Tan C
Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2016 Nov; 474(11):2364-2372. PubMed ID: 27549990
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Effect of porous orthopaedic implant material and structure on load sharing with simulated bone ingrowth: A finite element analysis comparing titanium and PEEK.
Carpenter RD; Klosterhoff BS; Torstrick FB; Foley KT; Burkus JK; Lee CSD; Gall K; Guldberg RE; Safranski DL
J Mech Behav Biomed Mater; 2018 Apr; 80():68-76. PubMed ID: 29414477
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Biomechanical assessment of a PEEK rod system for semi-rigid fixation of lumbar fusion constructs.
Gornet MF; Chan FW; Coleman JC; Murrell B; Nockels RP; Taylor BA; Lanman TH; Ochoa JA
J Biomech Eng; 2011 Aug; 133(8):081009. PubMed ID: 21950902
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Evaluation of a polyetheretherketone (PEEK) titanium composite interbody spacer in an ovine lumbar interbody fusion model: biomechanical, microcomputed tomographic, and histologic analyses.
McGilvray KC; Waldorff EI; Easley J; Seim HB; Zhang N; Linovitz RJ; Ryaby JT; Puttlitz CM
Spine J; 2017 Dec; 17(12):1907-1916. PubMed ID: 28751242
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. PEEK-Halo effect in interbody fusion.
Phan K; Hogan JA; Assem Y; Mobbs RJ
J Clin Neurosci; 2016 Feb; 24():138-40. PubMed ID: 26474500
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [Experimental fusion of the sheep cervical spine. Part I: Effect of cage design on interbody fusion].
Kandziora F; Pflugmacher R; Scholz M; Schäfer J; Schollmeier G; Schnake KJ; Bail H; Duda G; Haas NP
Chirurg; 2002 Sep; 73(9):909-17. PubMed ID: 12297957
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. In vivo experimental study of anterior cervical fusion using bioactive polyetheretherketone in a canine model.
Shimizu T; Fujibayashi S; Yamaguchi S; Otsuki B; Okuzu Y; Matsushita T; Kokubo T; Matsuda S
PLoS One; 2017; 12(9):e0184495. PubMed ID: 28886118
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Biomechanical Analysis of Porous Additive Manufactured Cages for Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Finite Element Analysis.
Zhang Z; Li H; Fogel GR; Liao Z; Li Y; Liu W
World Neurosurg; 2018 Mar; 111():e581-e591. PubMed ID: 29288855
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. [Application of a stand-alone interbody fusion cage based on a novel porous TiO2/glass ceramic--2: Biomechanical evaluation after implantation in the sheep cervical spine].
Korinth MC; Hero T; Pandorf T; Zell D
Biomed Tech (Berl); 2005 Apr; 50(4):111-8. PubMed ID: 15884708
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Biomechanical comparison of bioabsorbable cervical spine interbody fusion cages.
Pflugmacher R; Schleicher P; Gumnior S; Turan O; Scholz M; Eindorf T; Haas NP; Kandziora F
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2004 Aug; 29(16):1717-22. PubMed ID: 15303013
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Evaluation of bioabsorbable multiamino acid copolymer/α-tri-calcium phosphate interbody fusion cages in a goat model.
Chunguang Z; Yueming S; Chongqi T; Hong D; Fuxing P; Yonggang Y; Hong L
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2011 Dec; 36(25):E1615-22. PubMed ID: 21270683
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Titanium vs. polyetheretherketone (PEEK) interbody fusion: Meta-analysis and review of the literature.
Seaman S; Kerezoudis P; Bydon M; Torner JC; Hitchon PW
J Clin Neurosci; 2017 Oct; 44():23-29. PubMed ID: 28736113
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparison in the same intervertebral space between titanium-coated and uncoated PEEK cages in lumbar interbody fusion surgery.
Kashii M; Kitaguchi K; Makino T; Kaito T
J Orthop Sci; 2020 Jul; 25(4):565-570. PubMed ID: 31375363
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Spinal motion and intradiscal pressure measurements before and after lumbar spine instrumentation with titanium or PEEK rods.
Abode-Iyamah K; Kim SB; Grosland N; Kumar R; Belirgen M; Lim TH; Torner J; Hitchon PW
J Clin Neurosci; 2014 Apr; 21(4):651-5. PubMed ID: 24314848
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Biomechanical comparison of polyetheretherketone rods and titanium alloy rods in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a finite element analysis.
Li J; Cao S; Zhao B
BMC Surg; 2024 May; 24(1):169. PubMed ID: 38811965
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
