288 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24291409)
1. Interspinous device versus laminectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis: a comparative effectiveness study.
Patil CG; Sarmiento JM; Ugiliweneza B; Mukherjee D; Nuño M; Liu JC; Walia S; Lad SP; Boakye M
Spine J; 2014 Aug; 14(8):1484-92. PubMed ID: 24291409
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparative Analysis of Inpatient and Outpatient Interspinous Process Device Placement for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.
Ortega A; Sarmiento JM; Patil C; Mukherjee D; Ugiliweneza B; Nuño M; Lad S; Boakye M
J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg; 2015 Nov; 76(6):443-50. PubMed ID: 25915499
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Evaluation of Interspinous Spacer Outcomes in Degenerative Lumbar Canal Stenosis: Clinical Study.
Abdel Ghany W; Amer A; Saeed K; Emara E; Hamad A; Nosseir M; Dawood O; Nada MA
World Neurosurg; 2016 Nov; 95():556-564.e3. PubMed ID: 27514696
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Surgery for spinal stenosis: long-term reoperation rates, health care cost, and impact of instrumentation.
Lad SP; Babu R; Ugiliweneza B; Patil CG; Boakye M
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2014 May; 39(12):978-87. PubMed ID: 24718058
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Interspinous process devices(IPD) alone versus decompression surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis(LSS): A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Zhao XW; Ma JX; Ma XL; Li F; He WW; Jiang X; Wang Y; Han B; Lu B
Int J Surg; 2017 Mar; 39():57-64. PubMed ID: 28110031
[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. A randomized controlled trial of the X-Stop interspinous distractor device versus laminectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis with 2-year quality-of-life and cost-effectiveness outcomes.
Borg A; Hill CS; Nurboja B; Critchley G; Choi D
J Neurosurg Spine; 2021 Feb; 34(4):544-552. PubMed ID: 33530059
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Complications, reoperation rates, and health-care cost following surgical treatment of lumbar spondylolisthesis.
Lad SP; Babu R; Baker AA; Ugiliweneza B; Kong M; Bagley CA; Gottfried ON; Isaacs RE; Patil CG; Boakye M
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2013 Nov; 95(21):e162. PubMed ID: 24196474
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Interspinous process devices versus standard conventional surgical decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis: cost-utility analysis.
van den Akker-van Marle ME; Moojen WA; Arts MP; Vleggeert-Lankamp CL; Peul WC;
Spine J; 2016 Jun; 16(6):702-10. PubMed ID: 25452018
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Effectiveness of posterior decompression techniques compared with conventional laminectomy for lumbar stenosis.
Overdevest GM; Jacobs W; Vleggeert-Lankamp C; Thomé C; Gunzburg R; Peul W
Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2015 Mar; (3):CD010036. PubMed ID: 25760812
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. In Degenerative Spondylolisthesis, Unilateral Laminotomy for Bilateral Decompression Leads to Less Reoperations at 5 Years When Compared to Posterior Decompression With Instrumented Fusion: A Propensity-matched Retrospective Analysis.
Kuo CC; Merchant M; Kardile MP; Yacob A; Majid K; Bains RS
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2019 Nov; 44(21):1530-1537. PubMed ID: 31181016
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Cost-effectiveness of current treatment strategies for lumbar spinal stenosis: nonsurgical care, laminectomy, and X-STOP.
Burnett MG; Stein SC; Bartels RH
J Neurosurg Spine; 2010 Jul; 13(1):39-46. PubMed ID: 20594016
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Racial disparities in outcomes of spinal surgery for lumbar stenosis.
Lad SP; Bagley JH; Kenney KT; Ugiliweneza B; Kong M; Bagley CA; Gottfried ON; Isaacs RE; Patil CG; Boakye M
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2013 May; 38(11):927-35. PubMed ID: 23232216
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Reoperation and revision rates of 3 surgical treatment methods for lumbar stenosis associated with degenerative scoliosis and spondylolisthesis.
Brodke DS; Annis P; Lawrence BD; Woodbury AM; Daubs MD
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2013 Dec; 38(26):2287-94. PubMed ID: 24150428
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Cost-effectiveness and Safety of Interspinous Process Decompression (Superion).
Cairns K; Deer T; Sayed D; van Noort K; Liang K
Pain Med; 2019 Dec; 20(Suppl 2):S2-S8. PubMed ID: 31808529
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The Felix-trial. Double-blind randomization of interspinous implant or bony decompression for treatment of spinal stenosis related intermittent neurogenic claudication.
Moojen WA; Arts MP; Brand R; Koes BW; Peul WC
BMC Musculoskelet Disord; 2010 May; 11():100. PubMed ID: 20507568
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Minimally invasive decompression versus open laminectomy for central stenosis of the lumbar spine: pragmatic comparative effectiveness study.
Nerland US; Jakola AS; Solheim O; Weber C; Rao V; Lønne G; Solberg TK; Salvesen Ø; Carlsen SM; Nygaard ØP; Gulati S
BMJ; 2015 Apr; 350():h1603. PubMed ID: 25833966
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Outcomes after decompressive laminectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis: comparison between minimally invasive unilateral laminectomy for bilateral decompression and open laminectomy: clinical article.
Mobbs RJ; Li J; Sivabalan P; Raley D; Rao PJ
J Neurosurg Spine; 2014 Aug; 21(2):179-86. PubMed ID: 24878273
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Understanding the value of minimally invasive procedures for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis: the case of interspinous spacer devices.
Tapp SJ; Martin BI; Tosteson TD; Lurie JD; Weinstein MC; Deyo RA; Mirza SK; Tosteson ANA
Spine J; 2018 Apr; 18(4):584-592. PubMed ID: 28847740
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
