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 *

174 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24840246)

  • 1. Patient outcomes after laminotomy, hemilaminectomy, laminectomy and laminectomy with instrumented fusion for spinal canal stenosis: a propensity score-based study from the Spine Tango registry.
    Munting E; Röder C; Sobottke R; Dietrich D; Aghayev E;
    Eur Spine J; 2015 Feb; 24(2):358-68. PubMed ID: 24840246
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Is the duration of pre-operative conservative treatment associated with the clinical outcome following surgical decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis? A study based on the Spine Tango Registry.
    Zweig T; Enke J; Mannion AF; Sobottke R; Melloh M; Freeman BJ; Aghayev E;
    Eur Spine J; 2017 Feb; 26(2):488-500. PubMed ID: 27981454
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Does surgical technique influence clinical outcome after lumbar spinal stenosis decompression? A comparative effectiveness study from the Norwegian Registry for Spine Surgery.
    Hermansen E; Romild UK; Austevoll IM; Solberg T; Storheim K; Brox JI; Hellum C; Indrekvam K
    Eur Spine J; 2017 Feb; 26(2):420-427. PubMed ID: 27262561
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Long-term clinical outcomes after bilateral laminotomy or total laminectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis: a single-institution experience.
    Pietrantonio A; Trungu S; Famà I; Forcato S; Miscusi M; Raco A
    Neurosurg Focus; 2019 May; 46(5):E2. PubMed ID: 31042648
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Effectiveness of posterior decompression techniques compared with conventional laminectomy for lumbar stenosis.
    Overdevest G; Vleggeert-Lankamp C; Jacobs W; Thomé C; Gunzburg R; Peul W
    Eur Spine J; 2015 Oct; 24(10):2244-63. PubMed ID: 26184719
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The influence of preoperative spinal sagittal balance on clinical outcomes after microendoscopic laminotomy in patients with lumbar spinal canal stenosis.
    Dohzono S; Toyoda H; Matsumoto T; Suzuki A; Terai H; Nakamura H
    J Neurosurg Spine; 2015 Jul; 23(1):49-54. PubMed ID: 25840041
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. Superior outcomes of decompression with an interlaminar dynamic device versus decompression alone in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis and back pain: a cross registry study.
    Röder C; Baumgärtner B; Berlemann U; Aghayev E
    Eur Spine J; 2015 Oct; 24(10):2228-35. PubMed ID: 26187621
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Pathomechanism and prevention of further surgery after posterior decompression for lumbar spinal canal stenosis in patients with diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis.
    Nakajima H; Watanabe S; Honjoh K; Kubota A; Matsumine A
    Spine J; 2021 Jun; 21(6):955-962. PubMed ID: 33453385
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Comparison of 3 Different Minimally Invasive Surgical Techniques for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
    Hermansen E; Austevoll IM; Hellum C; Storheim K; Myklebust TÅ; Aaen J; Banitalebi H; Anvar M; Rekeland F; Brox JI; Franssen E; Weber C; Solberg TK; Furunes H; Grundnes O; Brisby H; Indrekvam K
    JAMA Netw Open; 2022 Mar; 5(3):e224291. PubMed ID: 35344046
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Irrigation endoscopic decompressive laminotomy. A new endoscopic approach for spinal stenosis decompression.
    Soliman HM
    Spine J; 2015 Oct; 15(10):2282-9. PubMed ID: 26165475
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Bilateral laminotomy through a unilateral approach (minimally invasive) versus open laminectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis.
    Horan J; Husien MB; Bolger C
    Br J Neurosurg; 2021 Apr; 35(2):161-165. PubMed ID: 32530321
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Outcome after less-invasive decompression of lumbar spinal stenosis: a randomized comparison of unilateral laminotomy, bilateral laminotomy, and laminectomy.
    Thomé C; Zevgaridis D; Leheta O; Bäzner H; Pöckler-Schöniger C; Wöhrle J; Schmiedek P
    J Neurosurg Spine; 2005 Aug; 3(2):129-41. PubMed ID: 16370302
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Study-protocol for a randomized controlled trial comparing clinical and radiological results after three different posterior decompression techniques for lumbar spinal stenosis: the Spinal Stenosis Trial (SST) (part of the NORDSTEN Study).
    Hermansen E; Austevoll IM; Romild UK; Rekeland F; Solberg T; Storheim K; Grundnes O; Aaen J; Brox JI; Hellum C; Indrekvam K
    BMC Musculoskelet Disord; 2017 Mar; 18(1):121. PubMed ID: 28327114
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Shape of the Spinal Canal Is Not Associated with Success Rates of Microsurgical Unilateral Laminotomy and Bilateral Decompression for Lumbar Spinal Canal Stenosis.
    Schatlo B; Horanin M; Hernandez-Durán S; Solomiichuk V; Rohde V
    World Neurosurg; 2018 Aug; 116():e42-e47. PubMed ID: 29602004
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Degenerative spondylolisthesis does not affect the outcome of unilateral laminotomy with bilateral decompression in patients with lumbar stenosis.
    Chang HS; Fujisawa N; Tsuchiya T; Oya S; Matsui T
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2014 Mar; 39(5):400-8. PubMed ID: 24365897
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Bilateral spinal decompression of lumbar central stenosis with the full-endoscopic interlaminar versus microsurgical laminotomy technique: a prospective, randomized, controlled study.
    Komp M; Hahn P; Oezdemir S; Giannakopoulos A; Heikenfeld R; Kasch R; Merk H; Godolias G; Ruetten S
    Pain Physician; 2015; 18(1):61-70. PubMed ID: 25675060
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Minimally invasive compared with open lumbar laminotomy: no functional benefits at 6 or 24 months after surgery.
    Ang CL; Phak-Boon Tow B; Fook S; Guo CM; Chen JL; Yue WM; Tan SB
    Spine J; 2015 Aug; 15(8):1705-12. PubMed ID: 24094717
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Comparison of bilateral decompression via unilateral laminotomy and conventional laminectomy for single-level degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis regarding low back pain, functional outcome, and quality of life - A Randomized Controlled, Prospective Trial.
    Ko S; Oh T
    J Orthop Surg Res; 2019 Aug; 14(1):252. PubMed ID: 31395104
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.