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 *

216 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24240484)

  • 41. Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Spondylolisthesis: Comparison Between Isthmic and Degenerative Spondylolisthesis.
    Kim JY; Park JY; Kim KH; Kuh SU; Chin DK; Kim KS; Cho YE
    World Neurosurg; 2015 Nov; 84(5):1284-93. PubMed ID: 26072461
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Lumbar degenerative disease treated by percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion or minimally invasive surgery-transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a case-matched comparative study.
    Xue YD; Diao WB; Ma C; Li J
    J Orthop Surg Res; 2021 Nov; 16(1):696. PubMed ID: 34838078
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. [Surgical treatment of degenerative lumbar instability by minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion].
    Liang B; Yin G; Zhao J; Li N; Hu Z
    Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi; 2011 Dec; 25(12):1449-54. PubMed ID: 22242343
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. 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]  

  • 45. Endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion without general anesthesia: operative and clinical outcomes in 100 consecutive patients with a minimum 1-year follow-up.
    Kolcun JPG; Brusko GD; Basil GW; Epstein R; Wang MY
    Neurosurg Focus; 2019 Apr; 46(4):E14. PubMed ID: 30933915
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Functional and radiological outcome of anterior retroperitoneal versus posterior transforaminal interbody fusion in the management of single-level lumbar degenerative disease.
    Bassani R; Morselli C; Querenghi AM; Nuara A; Sconfienza LM; Peretti GM
    Neurosurg Focus; 2020 Sep; 49(3):E2. PubMed ID: 32871567
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. A Novel Inextensible Endoscopic Tube Versus Traditional Extensible Retractor System in Single-Level Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Prospective Observation Study.
    Wu J; Zhang C; Lu K; Li C; Zhou Y
    Pain Physician; 2019 Nov; 22(6):E587-E599. PubMed ID: 31775412
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Clinical outcomes after minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and lateral lumbar interbody fusion for treatment of degenerative lumbar disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Keorochana G; Setrkraising K; Woratanarat P; Arirachakaran A; Kongtharvonskul J
    Neurosurg Rev; 2018 Jul; 41(3):755-770. PubMed ID: 28013419
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Is minimally invasive superior than open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for single-level degenerative lumbar diseases: a meta-analysis.
    Li A; Li X; Zhong Y
    J Orthop Surg Res; 2018 Sep; 13(1):241. PubMed ID: 30236132
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Full-Endoscopic Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Via an Interlaminar Approach Versus Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Preliminary Retrospective Study.
    Li Y; Dai Y; Wang B; Li L; Li P; Xu J; Jiang B; Lü G
    World Neurosurg; 2020 Dec; 144():e475-e482. PubMed ID: 32891847
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Comparison of Clinical Outcomes in the National Neurosurgery Quality and Outcomes Database for Open Versus Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion.
    Guan J; Bisson EF; Dailey AT; Hood RS; Schmidt MH
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2016 Apr; 41(7):E416-21. PubMed ID: 26536435
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Application of Gelatin Sponge Impregnated with a Mixture of 3 Drugs to Intraoperative Nerve Root Block Combined with Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Surgery in the Treatment of Adult Degenerative Scoliosis: A Clinical Observation Including 96 Patients.
    Du JP; Fan Y; Liu JJ; Zhang JN; Chang Liu S; Hao D
    World Neurosurg; 2017 Dec; 108():791-797. PubMed ID: 28986228
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus oblique lateral interbody fusion for lumbar degenerative disease: a meta-analysis.
    Zhang QY; Tan J; Huang K; Xie HQ
    BMC Musculoskelet Disord; 2021 Sep; 22(1):802. PubMed ID: 34537023
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Microendoscopy-Assisted Minimally Invasive Versus Open Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Lumbar Degenerative Diseases: 5-Year Outcomes.
    Yang Y; Liu ZY; Zhang LM; Pang M; Chhantyal K; Wu WB; Chen ZH; Luo CX; Rong LM; Liu B
    World Neurosurg; 2018 Aug; 116():e602-e610. PubMed ID: 29778600
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. A comparative study of perioperative complications between transforaminal versus posterior lumbar interbody fusion in degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis.
    Liu J; Deng H; Long X; Chen X; Xu R; Liu Z
    Eur Spine J; 2016 May; 25(5):1575-1580. PubMed ID: 26126415
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Open versus minimally invasive TLIF: literature review and meta-analysis.
    Hammad A; Wirries A; Ardeshiri A; Nikiforov O; Geiger F
    J Orthop Surg Res; 2019 Jul; 14(1):229. PubMed ID: 31331364
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Surgical and Clinical Results of Minimally Invasive Spinal Fusion Surgery in an Unselected Patient Cohort of a Spinal Care Unit.
    Senker W; Gruber A; Gmeiner M; Stefanits H; Sander K; Rössler P; Pflugmacher R
    Orthop Surg; 2018 Aug; 10(3):192-197. PubMed ID: 30152613
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. [COMPARISON OF EFFECTIVENESS AND CHANGE OF SAGITTAL SPINO-PELVIC PARAMETERS BETWEEN MINIMALLY INVASIVE TRANSFORAMINAL AND CONVENTIONAL OPEN POSTERIOR LUMBAR INTERBODY FUSIONS IN TREATMENT OF LOW-DEGREE ISTHMIC LUMBAR SPONDYLOLISTHESIS].
    Sun X; Zeng R; Li G; Wei B; Hu Z; Lin H; Chen G; Chen S; Sun J
    Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi; 2015 Dec; 29(12):1504-9. PubMed ID: 27044219
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Comparison of Minimally Invasive and Open Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Retrospective Cohort Study.
    Zhao J; Zhang S; Li X; He B; Ou Y; Jiang D
    Med Sci Monit; 2018 Dec; 24():8693-8698. PubMed ID: 30504756
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Incidence of and risk factors for superior facet violation in minimally invasive versus open pedicle screw placement during transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a comparative analysis.
    Lau D; Terman SW; Patel R; La Marca F; Park P
    J Neurosurg Spine; 2013 Apr; 18(4):356-61. PubMed ID: 23394166
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.