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 *

150 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29730459)

  • 1. Are patient-reported outcome measures biased by method of follow-up? Evaluating paper-based and digital follow-up after lumbar fusion surgery.
    Schröder ML; de Wispelaere MP; Staartjes VE
    Spine J; 2019 Jan; 19(1):65-70. PubMed ID: 29730459
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Laminectomy alone versus fusion for grade 1 lumbar spondylolisthesis in 426 patients from the prospective Quality Outcomes Database.
    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; Chotai S; DiGiorgio AM; Haid RW; Mummaneni PV
    J Neurosurg Spine; 2019 Feb; 30(2):234-241. PubMed ID: 30544348
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Prognostic factors associated with best outcomes (minimal symptom state) following fusion for lumbar degenerative conditions.
    Crawford CH; Glassman SD; Djurasovic M; Owens RK; Gum JL; Carreon LY
    Spine J; 2019 Feb; 19(2):187-190. PubMed ID: 29960112
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Patients with predominantly back pain at the time of lumbar fusion for low-grade spondylolisthesis experience similar clinical improvement to patients with predominantly leg pain: mid-term results.
    Khan JM; Harada GK; Basques BA; Nolte MT; Louie PK; Iloanya M; Tchalukov K; Berkowitz M; Derman P; Colman M; An HS
    Spine J; 2020 Feb; 20(2):276-282. PubMed ID: 31563578
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Follow-up score, change score or percentage change score for determining clinical important outcome following surgery? An observational study from the Norwegian registry for Spine surgery evaluating patient reported outcome measures in lumbar spinal stenosis and lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis.
    Austevoll IM; Gjestad R; Grotle M; Solberg T; Brox JI; Hermansen E; Rekeland F; Indrekvam K; Storheim K; Hellum C
    BMC Musculoskelet Disord; 2019 Jan; 20(1):31. PubMed ID: 30658613
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Women do not fare worse than men after lumbar fusion surgery: Two-year follow-up results from 4,780 prospectively collected patients in the Swedish National Spine Register with lumbar degenerative disc disease and chronic low back pain.
    Triebel J; Snellman G; Sandén B; Strömqvist F; Robinson Y
    Spine J; 2017 May; 17(5):656-662. PubMed ID: 27845232
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A prospective, multi-institutional comparative effectiveness study of lumbar spine surgery in morbidly obese patients: does minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion result in superior outcomes?
    Adogwa O; Carr K; Thompson P; Hoang K; Darlington T; Perez E; Fatemi P; Gottfried O; Cheng J; Isaacs RE
    World Neurosurg; 2015 May; 83(5):860-6. PubMed ID: 25535070
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Is the use of minimally invasive fusion technologies associated with improved outcomes after elective interbody lumbar fusion? Analysis of a nationwide prospective patient-reported outcomes registry.
    McGirt MJ; Parker SL; Mummaneni P; Knightly J; Pfortmiller D; Foley K; Asher AL
    Spine J; 2017 Jul; 17(7):922-932. PubMed ID: 28254672
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. [Adjacent segment degeneration after lumbosacral fusion in spondylolisthesis: a retrospective radiological and clinical analysis].
    Zencica P; Chaloupka R; Hladíková J; Krbec M
    Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech; 2010 Apr; 77(2):124-30. PubMed ID: 20447355
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Long-term durability of minimal invasive posterior transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a clinical and radiographic follow-up.
    Rouben D; Casnellie M; Ferguson M
    J Spinal Disord Tech; 2011 Jul; 24(5):288-96. PubMed ID: 20975594
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Do measures of surgical effectiveness at 1 year after lumbar spine surgery accurately predict 2-year outcomes?
    Adogwa O; Elsamadicy AA; Han JL; Cheng J; Karikari I; Bagley CA
    J Neurosurg Spine; 2016 Dec; 25(6):689-696. PubMed ID: 26722957
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. Revisions for screw malposition and clinical outcomes after robot-guided lumbar fusion for spondylolisthesis.
    Schröder ML; Staartjes VE
    Neurosurg Focus; 2017 May; 42(5):E12. PubMed ID: 28463610
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Stand-alone lateral lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of symptomatic adjacent segment degeneration following previous lumbar fusion.
    Louie PK; Varthi AG; Narain AS; Lei V; Bohl DD; Shifflett GD; Phillips FM
    Spine J; 2018 Nov; 18(11):2025-2032. PubMed ID: 29679730
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Accurately measuring the quality and effectiveness of lumbar surgery in registry efforts: determining the most valid and responsive instruments.
    Godil SS; Parker SL; Zuckerman SL; Mendenhall SK; Glassman SD; McGirt MJ
    Spine J; 2014 Dec; 14(12):2885-91. PubMed ID: 24768731
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Women fare best following surgery for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a comparison of the most and least satisfied patients utilizing data from the Quality Outcomes Database.
    Chan AK; Bisson EF; Bydon M; Glassman SD; Foley KT; Potts EA; Shaffrey CI; Shaffrey ME; Coric D; Knightly JJ; Park P; Fu KM; Slotkin JR; Asher AL; Virk MS; Kerezoudis P; Chotai S; DiGiorgio AM; Chan AY; Haid RW; Mummaneni PV
    Neurosurg Focus; 2018 Jan; 44(1):E3. PubMed ID: 29290130
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Mid- to long-term results of total lumbar disc replacement: a prospective analysis with 5- to 10-year follow-up.
    Siepe CJ; Heider F; Wiechert K; Hitzl W; Ishak B; Mayer MH
    Spine J; 2014 Aug; 14(8):1417-31. PubMed ID: 24448028
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Patient-reported outcomes unbiased by length of follow-up after lumbar degenerative spine surgery: Do we need 2 years of follow-up?
    Staartjes VE; Siccoli A; de Wispelaere MP; Schröder ML
    Spine J; 2019 Apr; 19(4):637-644. PubMed ID: 30296576
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The efficacy of lumbar discectomy and single-level fusion for spondylolisthesis: results from the NeuroPoint-SD registry: clinical article.
    Ghogawala Z; Shaffrey CI; Asher AL; Heary RF; Logvinenko T; Malhotra NR; Dante SJ; Hurlbert RJ; Douglas AF; Magge SN; Mummaneni PV; Cheng JS; Smith JS; Kaiser MG; Abbed KM; Sciubba DM; Resnick DK
    J Neurosurg Spine; 2013 Nov; 19(5):555-63. PubMed ID: 24010898
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The safety and efficacy of OP-1 (rhBMP-7) as a replacement for iliac crest autograft for posterolateral lumbar arthrodesis: minimum 4-year follow-up of a pilot study.
    Vaccaro AR; Whang PG; Patel T; Phillips FM; Anderson DG; Albert TJ; Hilibrand AS; Brower RS; Kurd MF; Appannagari A; Patel M; Fischgrund JS
    Spine J; 2008; 8(3):457-65. PubMed ID: 17588821
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.