192 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23981817)
1. Effect of vertebroplasty on the compressive strength of vertebral bodies.
Pneumaticos SG; Triantafyllopoulos GK; Evangelopoulos DS; Hipp JA; Heggeness MH
Spine J; 2013 Dec; 13(12):1921-7. PubMed ID: 23981817
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Biomechanical evaluation of an injectable calcium phosphate cement for vertebroplasty.
Lim TH; Brebach GT; Renner SM; Kim WJ; Kim JG; Lee RE; Andersson GB; An HS
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2002 Jun; 27(12):1297-302. PubMed ID: 12065977
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Biomechanical effects of unipedicular vertebroplasty on intact vertebrae.
Higgins KB; Harten RD; Langrana NA; Reiter MF
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2003 Jul; 28(14):1540-7; discussion 1548. PubMed ID: 12865841
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Vertebroplasty comparing injectable calcium phosphate cement compared with polymethylmethacrylate in a unique canine vertebral body large defect model.
Turner TM; Urban RM; Singh K; Hall DJ; Renner SM; Lim TH; Tomlinson MJ; An HS
Spine J; 2008; 8(3):482-7. PubMed ID: 18455113
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The effect of vertebral body percentage fill on mechanical behavior during percutaneous vertebroplasty.
Molloy S; Mathis JM; Belkoff SM
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2003 Jul; 28(14):1549-54. PubMed ID: 12865843
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Vertebroplasty: only small cement volumes are required to normalize stress distributions on the vertebral bodies.
Luo J; Daines L; Charalambous A; Adams MA; Annesley-Williams DJ; Dolan P
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2009 Dec; 34(26):2865-73. PubMed ID: 20010394
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Biomechanical evaluation of kyphoplasty with calcium sulfate cement in a cadaveric osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture model.
Perry A; Mahar A; Massie J; Arrieta N; Garfin S; Kim C
Spine J; 2005; 5(5):489-93. PubMed ID: 16153574
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Restoring geometric and loading alignment of the thoracic spine with a vertebral compression fracture: effects of balloon (bone tamp) inflation and spinal extension.
Gaitanis IN; Carandang G; Phillips FM; Magovern B; Ghanayem AJ; Voronov LI; Havey RM; Zindrick MR; Hadjipavlou AG; Patwardhan AG
Spine J; 2005; 5(1):45-54. PubMed ID: 15653084
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Biomechanical comparison of transpedicular versus extrapedicular vertebroplasty using polymethylmethacrylate.
Erkan S; Wu C; Mehbod AA; Cho W; Transfeldt EE
J Spinal Disord Tech; 2010 May; 23(3):180-5. PubMed ID: 20065863
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Biomechanical changes after the augmentation of experimental osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures in the cadaveric thoracic spine.
Kayanja MM; Togawa D; Lieberman IH
Spine J; 2005; 5(1):55-63. PubMed ID: 15653085
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Preliminary biomechanical evaluation of prophylactic vertebral reinforcement adjacent to vertebroplasty under cyclic loading.
Oakland RJ; Furtado NR; Wilcox RK; Timothy J; Hall RM
Spine J; 2009 Feb; 9(2):174-81. PubMed ID: 18640876
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Vertebroplasty with high-viscosity polymethylmethacrylate cement facilitates vertebral body restoration in vitro.
Rüger M; Schmoelz W
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2009 Nov; 34(24):2619-25. PubMed ID: 19881400
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. A biomechanical analysis of intravertebral pressures during vertebroplasty of cadaveric spines with and without simulated metastases.
Reidy D; Ahn H; Mousavi P; Finkelstein J; Whyne CM
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2003 Jul; 28(14):1534-9. PubMed ID: 12865840
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Prophylactic vertebroplasty may reduce the risk of adjacent intact vertebra from fatigue injury: an ex vivo biomechanical study.
Chiang CK; Wang YH; Yang CY; Yang BD; Wang JL
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2009 Feb; 34(4):356-64. PubMed ID: 19214094
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. A biomechanical investigation of vertebroplasty in osteoporotic compression fractures and in prophylactic vertebral reinforcement.
Furtado N; Oakland RJ; Wilcox RK; Hall RM
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2007 Aug; 32(17):E480-7. PubMed ID: 17762281
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Prophylactic vertebroplasty can decrease the fracture risk of adjacent vertebrae: an in vitro cadaveric study.
Aquarius R; Homminga J; Hosman AJ; Verdonschot N; Tanck E
Med Eng Phys; 2014 Jul; 36(7):944-8. PubMed ID: 24736018
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Is kyphoplasty better than vertebroplasty in restoring normal mechanical function to an injured spine?
Luo J; Bertram W; Sangar D; Adams MA; Annesley-Williams DJ; Dolan P
Bone; 2010 Apr; 46(4):1050-7. PubMed ID: 20004264
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. How are adjacent spinal levels affected by vertebral fracture and by vertebroplasty? A biomechanical study on cadaveric spines.
Luo J; Annesley-Williams DJ; Adams MA; Dolan P
Spine J; 2017 Jun; 17(6):863-874. PubMed ID: 28167249
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The biomechanical evaluation of calcium phosphate cements for use in vertebroplasty.
Hong SJ; Park YK; Kim JH; Lee SH; Ryu KN; Park CM; Kim YS
J Neurosurg Spine; 2006 Feb; 4(2):154-9. PubMed ID: 16506483
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Mechanical efficacy of vertebroplasty: influence of cement type, BMD, fracture severity, and disc degeneration.
Luo J; Skrzypiec DM; Pollintine P; Adams MA; Annesley-Williams DJ; Dolan P
Bone; 2007 Apr; 40(4):1110-9. PubMed ID: 17229596
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
