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.
2. Footprint mismatch of cervical disc prostheses with Chinese cervical anatomic dimensions. Dong L; Tan MS; Yan QH; Yi P; Yang F; Tang XS; Hao QY Chin Med J (Engl); 2015 Jan; 128(2):197-202. PubMed ID: 25591562 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Footprint mismatch in total cervical disc arthroplasty. Thaler M; Hartmann S; Gstöttner M; Lechner R; Gabl M; Bach C Eur Spine J; 2013 Apr; 22(4):759-65. PubMed ID: 23184184 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Cervical Footprint Anthropometry in Indian Population: Implications on Design of Artificial Disc Replacement Devices. Kulkarni AG; Patil VM; Bangalore SK; Saraf A Asian Spine J; 2016 Feb; 10(1):20-6. PubMed ID: 26949454 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Analysis of segmental cervical spine vertebral motion after prodisc-C cervical disc replacement. Park JJ; Quirno M; Cunningham MR; Schwarzkopf R; Bendo JA; Spivak JM; Goldstein JA Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2010 Apr; 35(8):E285-9. PubMed ID: 20354472 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Footprint mismatch in lumbar total disc arthroplasty. Gstoettner M; Heider D; Liebensteiner M; Bach CM Eur Spine J; 2008 Nov; 17(11):1470-5. PubMed ID: 18791748 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. A new cervical artificial disc prosthesis based on physiological curvature of end plate: a finite element analysis. Yu CC; Liu P; Huang DG; Jiang YH; Feng H; Hao DJ Spine J; 2016 Nov; 16(11):1384-1391. PubMed ID: 27345748 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Stress analysis of the interface between cervical vertebrae end plates and the Bryan, Prestige LP, and ProDisc-C cervical disc prostheses: an in vivo image-based finite element study. Lin CY; Kang H; Rouleau JP; Hollister SJ; Marca FL Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2009 Jul; 34(15):1554-60. PubMed ID: 19564765 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Analysis of in vivo kinematics of 3 different cervical devices: Bryan disc, ProDisc-C, and Prestige LP disc. Kowalczyk I; Lazaro BC; Fink M; Rabin D; Duggal N J Neurosurg Spine; 2011 Dec; 15(6):630-5. PubMed ID: 21905776 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Geometry of inferior endplates of the cervical spine. Lou J; Liu H; Rong X; Li H; Wang B; Gong Q Clin Neurol Neurosurg; 2016 Mar; 142():132-136. PubMed ID: 26852320 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Analysis of load sharing on uncovertebral and facet joints at the C5-6 level with implantation of the Bryan, Prestige LP, or ProDisc-C cervical disc prosthesis: an in vivo image-based finite element study. Kang H; Park P; La Marca F; Hollister SJ; Lin CY Neurosurg Focus; 2010 Jun; 28(6):E9. PubMed ID: 20568924 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Morphological studies of cartilage endplates in subaxial cervical region. Zhao S; Hao D; Jiang Y; Huang D; Ge C; Feng H Eur Spine J; 2016 Jul; 25(7):2218-22. PubMed ID: 26611364 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Does the sizing of current cervical disc arthroplasty systems match Chinese cervical anatomic dimensions? Wang L; Bai M; Li XB; Wang ZR; Wang B; Huang AB Front Bioeng Biotechnol; 2022; 10():1036223. PubMed ID: 36394034 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. A morphometric study of the middle and lower cervical vertebral endplates and their components. Feng H; Fang XY; Huang DG; Yu CC; Li HK; Zhao SC; Ge CY; Bai RH; Hao DJ Medicine (Baltimore); 2017 Mar; 96(10):e6296. PubMed ID: 28272256 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Effect of arthroplasty design on cervical spine kinematics: analysis of the Bryan Disc, ProDisc-C, and Synergy disc. Lazaro BC; Yucesoy K; Yuksel KZ; Kowalczyk I; Rabin D; Fink M; Duggal N Neurosurg Focus; 2010 Jun; 28(6):E6. PubMed ID: 20568921 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Morphologic evaluation of Chinese cervical endplate and uncinate process by three-dimensional computed tomography reconstructions for helping design cervical disc prosthesis. Zhu YH; Cheng KL; Zhong Z; Li YQ; Zhu QS J Chin Med Assoc; 2016 Sep; 79(9):500-6. PubMed ID: 27236369 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. An analysis of heterotopic ossification in cervical disc arthroplasty: a novel morphologic classification of an ossified mass. Jin YJ; Park SB; Kim MJ; Kim KJ; Kim HJ Spine J; 2013 Apr; 13(4):408-20. PubMed ID: 23332520 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Radiological changes of the operated and adjacent segments following cervical arthroplasty after a minimum 24-month follow-up: comparison between the Bryan and Prodisc-C devices. Ryu KS; Park CK; Jun SC; Huh HY J Neurosurg Spine; 2010 Sep; 13(3):299-307. PubMed ID: 20809721 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Magnetic resonance imaging clarity of the Bryan, Prodisc-C, Prestige LP, and PCM cervical arthroplasty devices. Sekhon LH; Duggal N; Lynch JJ; Haid RW; Heller JG; Riew KD; Seex K; Anderson PA Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2007 Mar; 32(6):673-80. PubMed ID: 17413473 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Width of the cervical intervertebral neuroforamina after total disc replacement with the Cerkinetic prosthesis: a three-dimensional simulation using a computer-aided design model. Bostelmann R; Steiger HJ; Tauber M; Leimert M J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg; 2013 Jul; 74(4):205-8. PubMed ID: 23737256 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]