185 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27050538)
1. Three-Year Follow-up of the Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Trial of Coflex Interlaminar Stabilization vs Instrumented Fusion in Patients With Lumbar Stenosis.
Bae HW; Davis RJ; Lauryssen C; Leary S; Maislin G; Musacchio MJ
Neurosurgery; 2016 Aug; 79(2):169-81. PubMed ID: 27050538
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Decompression and Coflex interlaminar stabilization compared with decompression and instrumented spinal fusion for spinal stenosis and low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis: two-year results from the prospective, randomized, multicenter, Food and Drug Administration Investigational Device Exemption trial.
Davis RJ; Errico TJ; Bae H; Auerbach JD
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2013 Aug; 38(18):1529-39. PubMed ID: 23680830
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Can low-grade spondylolisthesis be effectively treated by either coflex interlaminar stabilization or laminectomy and posterior spinal fusion? Two-year clinical and radiographic results from the randomized, prospective, multicenter US investigational device exemption trial: clinical article.
Davis R; Auerbach JD; Bae H; Errico TJ
J Neurosurg Spine; 2013 Aug; 19(2):174-84. PubMed ID: 23725394
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Prospective, randomized, multicenter study with 2-year follow-up to compare the performance of decompression with and without interlaminar stabilization.
Schmidt S; Franke J; Rauschmann M; Adelt D; Bonsanto MM; Sola S
J Neurosurg Spine; 2018 Apr; 28(4):406-415. PubMed ID: 29372860
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Therapeutic sustainability and durability of coflex interlaminar stabilization after decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis: a four year assessment.
Bae HW; Lauryssen C; Maislin G; Leary S; Musacchio MJ
Int J Spine Surg; 2015; 9():15. PubMed ID: 26056630
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Evaluation of Decompression and Interlaminar Stabilization Compared with Decompression and Fusion for the Treatment of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: 5-year Follow-up of a Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Trial.
Musacchio MJ; Lauryssen C; Davis RJ; Bae HW; Peloza JH; Guyer RD; Zigler JE; Ohnmeiss DD; Leary S
Int J Spine Surg; 2016; 10():6. PubMed ID: 26913226
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Evaluation of Coflex interspinous stabilization following decompression compared with decompression and posterior lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease: A minimum 5-year follow-up study.
Yuan W; Su QJ; Liu T; Yang JC; Kang N; Guan L; Hai Y
J Clin Neurosci; 2017 Jan; 35():24-29. PubMed ID: 27815024
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Distraction Laminoplasty With Interlaminar Lumbar Instrumented Fusion (ILIF) for Lumbar Stenosis With or Without Grade 1 Spondylolisthesis: Technique and 2-Year Outcomes.
Cuéllar JM; Field JS; Bae HW
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2016 Apr; 41 Suppl 8():S97-S105. PubMed ID: 26839990
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Decompression and coflex interlaminar stabilisation compared with conventional surgical procedures for lumbar spinal stenosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Li AM; Li X; Yang Z
Int J Surg; 2017 Apr; 40():60-67. PubMed ID: 28254421
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Application of the Coflex Interlaminar Stabilization in Patients With L5/S1 Degenerative Diseases: Minimum 4-Year Follow-up.
Xu C; Mao F; Wang X; Lin Y; Xu H
Am J Ther; 2016; 23(6):e1813-e1818. PubMed ID: 26291597
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Prospective, randomized, multicenter Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption study of lumbar total disc replacement with the CHARITE artificial disc versus lumbar fusion: five-year follow-up.
Guyer RD; McAfee PC; Banco RJ; Bitan FD; Cappuccino A; Geisler FH; Hochschuler SH; Holt RT; Jenis LG; Majd ME; Regan JJ; Tromanhauser SG; Wong DC; Blumenthal SL
Spine J; 2009 May; 9(5):374-86. PubMed ID: 18805066
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Internal decompression for spinal stenosis (IDSS) for decompression and use of interlaminar dynamic device (CoflexTM) for stabilization in the surgical management of degenerative lumbar canal stenosis with or without mild segmental instability: our initial results.
Pawar SG; Dhar A; Prasad A; Munjal S; Ramani PS
Neurol Res; 2017 Apr; 39(4):305-310. PubMed ID: 28320256
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparative cost effectiveness of Coflex® interlaminar stabilization versus instrumented posterolateral lumbar fusion for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis and spondylolisthesis.
Schmier JK; Halevi M; Maislin G; Ong K
Clinicoecon Outcomes Res; 2014; 6():125-31. PubMed ID: 24672250
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Interlaminar stabilization offers greater biomechanical advantage compared to interspinous stabilization after lumbar decompression: a finite element analysis.
Lu T; Lu Y
J Orthop Surg Res; 2020 Jul; 15(1):291. PubMed ID: 32727615
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. Interlaminar stabilization for spinal stenosis in the Medicare population.
Grinberg SZ; Simon RB; Dowe C; Brecevich AT; Cammisa FP; Abjornson C
Spine J; 2020 Dec; 20(12):1948-1959. PubMed ID: 32659365
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Does an interspinous device (Coflex) improve the outcome of decompressive surgery in lumbar spinal stenosis? One-year follow up of a prospective case control study of 60 patients.
Richter A; Schütz C; Hauck M; Halm H
Eur Spine J; 2010 Feb; 19(2):283-9. PubMed ID: 19967546
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Lumbar Facet Arthroplasty Versus Fusion for Grade-I Degenerative Spondylolisthesis with Stenosis: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial.
Nassr A; Coric D; Pinter ZW; Sebastian AS; Freedman BA; Whiting D; Chahlavi A; Pirris S; Phan N; Meyer SA; Tahernia AD; Sandhu F; Deutsch H; Potts EA; Cheng J; Chi JH; Groff M; Anekstein Y; Steinmetz MP; Welch WC
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2024 Jun; 106(12):1041-1053. PubMed ID: 38713762
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Efficacy and Safety of Lumbar Dynamic Stabilization Device Coflex for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Li T; Yan J; Ren Q; Hu J; Wang F; Liu X
World Neurosurg; 2023 Feb; 170():7-20. PubMed ID: 36481444
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. [Device implanted complications of Coflex interspinous dynamic stabilization].
Zang L; Hai Y; Su QJ; Lu SB; Zhang CS; Yang JC; Guan L; Kang N; Meng XL; Liu T; Du P
Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi; 2012 Sep; 50(9):782-7. PubMed ID: 23157951
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
