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.
299 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29705337)
1. Cost-effectiveness of circumferential fusion for lumbar spondylolisthesis: propensity-matched comparison of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with anterior-posterior fusion. Jazini E; Gum JL; Glassman SD; Crawford CH; Djurasovic M; Owens RK; Dimar JR; McGraw KE; Carreon LY Spine J; 2018 Nov; 18(11):1969-1973. PubMed ID: 29705337 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Modeled cost-effectiveness of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion compared with posterolateral fusion for spondylolisthesis using N(2)QOD data. Carreon LY; Glassman SD; Ghogawala Z; Mummaneni PV; McGirt MJ; Asher AL J Neurosurg Spine; 2016 Jun; 24(6):916-21. PubMed ID: 26895529 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. A protocol of a randomized controlled multicenter trial for surgical treatment of lumbar spondylolisthesis: the Lumbar Interbody Fusion Trial (LIFT). de Kunder SL; Rijkers K; van Kuijk SM; Evers SM; de Bie RA; van Santbrink H BMC Musculoskelet Disord; 2016 Oct; 17(1):417. PubMed ID: 27716168 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The cost-effectiveness of interbody fusions versus posterolateral fusions in 137 patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis. Bydon M; Macki M; Abt NB; Witham TF; Wolinsky JP; Gokaslan ZL; Bydon A; Sciubba DM Spine J; 2015 Mar; 15(3):492-8. PubMed ID: 25463402 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Cost-effectiveness of minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative spondylolisthesis associated low-back and leg pain over two years. Parker SL; Adogwa O; Bydon A; Cheng J; McGirt MJ World Neurosurg; 2012 Jul; 78(1-2):178-84. PubMed ID: 22120269 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Cost-effectiveness of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for Grade I degenerative spondylolisthesis. Adogwa O; Parker SL; Davis BJ; Aaronson O; Devin C; Cheng JS; McGirt MJ J Neurosurg Spine; 2011 Aug; 15(2):138-43. PubMed ID: 21529203 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative spondylolisthesis: comparative effectiveness and cost-utility analysis. Parker SL; Mendenhall SK; Shau DN; Zuckerman SL; Godil SS; Cheng JS; McGirt MJ World Neurosurg; 2014; 82(1-2):230-8. PubMed ID: 23321379 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. A perioperative cost analysis comparing single-level minimally invasive and open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Singh K; Nandyala SV; Marquez-Lara A; Fineberg SJ; Oglesby M; Pelton MA; Andersson GB; Isayeva D; Jegier BJ; Phillips FM Spine J; 2014 Aug; 14(8):1694-701. PubMed ID: 24252237 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Cost-effectiveness of lumbar discectomy and single-level fusion for spondylolisthesis: experience with the NeuroPoint-SD registry. Mummaneni PV; Whitmore RG; Curran JN; Ziewacz JE; Wadhwa R; Shaffrey CI; Asher AL; Heary RF; Cheng JS; Hurlbert RJ; Douglas AF; Smith JS; Malhotra NR; Dante SJ; Magge SN; Kaiser MG; Abbed KM; Resnick DK; Ghogawala Z Neurosurg Focus; 2014 Jun; 36(6):E3. PubMed ID: 24881635 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A comparison of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and decompression alone for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Chan AK; Bisson EF; Bydon M; Glassman SD; Foley KT; Potts EA; Shaffrey CI; Shaffrey ME; Coric D; Knightly JJ; Park P; Wang MY; Fu KM; Slotkin JR; Asher AL; Virk MS; Kerezoudis P; Alvi MA; Guan J; Haid RW; Mummaneni PV Neurosurg Focus; 2019 May; 46(5):E13. PubMed ID: 31042655 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. A Cost-Effectiveness Comparison Between Open Transforaminal and Minimally Invasive Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusions Using the Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio at 2-Year Follow-up. Gandhoke GS; Shin HM; Chang YF; Tempel Z; Gerszten PC; Okonkwo DO; Kanter AS Neurosurgery; 2016 Apr; 78(4):585-95. PubMed ID: 26726969 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Circumferential fusion: a comparative analysis between anterior lumbar interbody fusion with posterior pedicle screw fixation and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for L5-S1 isthmic spondylolisthesis. Tye EY; Tanenbaum JE; Alonso AS; Xiao R; Steinmetz MP; Mroz TE; Savage JW Spine J; 2018 Mar; 18(3):464-471. PubMed ID: 28821444 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Cost analysis of anterior-posterior circumferential fusion and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Andres TM; Park JJ; Ricart Hoffiz PA; McHugh BJ; Warren DT; Errico TJ Spine J; 2013 Jun; 13(6):651-6. PubMed ID: 23353002 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Posterolateral fusion (PLF) versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) for spondylolisthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Levin JM; Tanenbaum JE; Steinmetz MP; Mroz TE; Overley SC Spine J; 2018 Jun; 18(6):1088-1098. PubMed ID: 29452283 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. Comparison of (Partial) economic evaluations of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) versus Posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in adults with lumbar spondylolisthesis: A systematic review. Caelers IJMH; de Kunder SL; Rijkers K; van Hemert WLW; de Bie RA; Evers SMAA; van Santbrink H PLoS One; 2021; 16(2):e0245963. PubMed ID: 33571291 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) versus posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in lumbar spondylolisthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. de Kunder SL; van Kuijk SMJ; Rijkers K; Caelers IJMH; van Hemert WLW; de Bie RA; van Santbrink H Spine J; 2017 Nov; 17(11):1712-1721. PubMed ID: 28647584 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Minimally invasive versus open fusion for Grade I degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: analysis of the Quality Outcomes Database. Mummaneni PV; Bisson EF; Kerezoudis P; Glassman S; Foley K; Slotkin JR; Potts E; Shaffrey M; Shaffrey CI; Coric D; Knightly J; Park P; Fu KM; Devin CJ; Chotai S; Chan AK; Virk M; Asher AL; Bydon M Neurosurg Focus; 2017 Aug; 43(2):E11. PubMed ID: 28760035 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Clinical and radiographic outcomes of bilateral decompression via a unilateral approach with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis with stenosis. Cheng X; Zhang K; Sun X; Zhao C; Li H; Ni B; Zhao J Spine J; 2017 Aug; 17(8):1127-1133. PubMed ID: 28416439 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Benefit of Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion vs Posterolateral Spinal Fusion in Lumbar Spine Disorders: A Propensity-Matched Analysis From the National Neurosurgical Quality and Outcomes Database Registry. Glassman SD; Carreon LY; Ghogawala Z; Foley KT; McGirt MJ; Asher AL Neurosurgery; 2016 Sep; 79(3):397-405. PubMed ID: 26579968 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]