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 *

132 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33122189)

  • 1. Expandable Interbody Spacers: A Two-Year Study Evaluating Radiologic and Clinical Outcomes With Patient-Reported Outcomes.
    Mulvaney G; Monk S; Clemente JD; Pfortmiller D; Coric D
    Int J Spine Surg; 2020 Dec; 14(s3):S31-S38. PubMed ID: 33122189
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using Expandable vs Static Titanium Interbody Cages: A Prospective Cohort Study of Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes.
    Huo CW; Malham GM; Biddau DT; Chung T; Wang YY
    Int J Spine Surg; 2023 Apr; 17(2):265-275. PubMed ID: 36889901
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with expandable articulating interbody spacers significantly improves radiographic outcomes compared to static interbody spacers.
    Russo AJ; Schopler SA; Stetzner KJ; Shirk T
    J Spine Surg; 2021 Sep; 7(3):300-309. PubMed ID: 34734134
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with expandable versus static interbody devices: radiographic assessment of sagittal segmental and pelvic parameters.
    Hawasli AH; Khalifeh JM; Chatrath A; Yarbrough CK; Ray WZ
    Neurosurg Focus; 2017 Aug; 43(2):E10. PubMed ID: 28760032
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Laterally Placed Expandable Interbody Spacers With and Without Adjustable Lordosis Improve Radiographic and Clinical Outcomes: A Two-Year Follow-Up Study.
    Li YM; Huang Z; Towner J; Li YI; Bucklen BS
    Cureus; 2021 Dec; 13(12):e20302. PubMed ID: 35028207
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Static versus Expandable Interbody Fusion Devices: A Comparison of 1-Year Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes in Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion.
    Ledesma JA; Lambrechts MJ; Dees A; Thomas T; Hiranaka CG; Kurd MF; Radcliff KE; Anderson DG
    Asian Spine J; 2023 Feb; 17(1):61-74. PubMed ID: 35785911
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Assessment of radiographic and clinical outcomes of an articulating expandable interbody cage in minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for spondylolisthesis.
    Massie LW; Zakaria HM; Schultz LR; Basheer A; Buraimoh MA; Chang V
    Neurosurg Focus; 2018 Jan; 44(1):E8. PubMed ID: 29290133
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Expandable Technology Improves Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Degenerative Disc Disease.
    Li YM; Huang Z; Towner J; Li YI; Riggleman JR; Ledonio C
    Int J Spine Surg; 2021 Feb; 15(1):87-93. PubMed ID: 33900961
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Clinical and Short-Term Radiographic Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion With Expandable Lordotic Devices.
    McMordie JH; Schmidt KP; Gard AP; Gillis CC
    Neurosurgery; 2020 Feb; 86(2):E147-E155. PubMed ID: 31584070
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Two-Year Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of Expandable Interbody Spacers Following Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Prospective Study.
    Kim C; Cohen DS; Smith MD; Dix GA; Luna IY; Joshua G
    Int J Spine Surg; 2020 Aug; 14(4):518-526. PubMed ID: 32986572
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Posterior lumbar interbody fusion using recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein type 2 with cylindrical interbody cages.
    Haid RW; Branch CL; Alexander JT; Burkus JK
    Spine J; 2004; 4(5):527-38; discussion 538-9. PubMed ID: 15363423
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Bidirectional Expandable Technology for Transforaminal or Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Retrospective Analysis of Safety and Performance.
    Coric D; Roybal RR; Grubb M; Rossi V; Yu AK; Swink IR; Long J; Cheng BC; Inzana JA
    Int J Spine Surg; 2020 Dec; 14(s3):S22-S30. PubMed ID: 33122186
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Long-term radiographic outcomes of expandable versus static cages in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.
    Chang CC; Chou D; Pennicooke B; Rivera J; Tan LA; Berven S; Mummaneni PV
    J Neurosurg Spine; 2021 Mar; 34(3):471-480. PubMed ID: 33186902
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using Expandable Technology: A Clinical and Radiographic Analysis of 50 Patients.
    Kim CW; Doerr TM; Luna IY; Joshua G; Shen SR; Fu X; Wu AM
    World Neurosurg; 2016 Jun; 90():228-235. PubMed ID: 26921700
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Radiographic and Patient-Reported Outcomes of Lordotic Versus Non-lordotic Static Interbody Devices in Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Longitudinal Comparative Cohort Study.
    Lawless MH; Claus CF; Tong D; Jordan N; Dosanjh A; Hanson CT; Carr DA; Houseman CM
    Cureus; 2022 Jan; 14(1):e21273. PubMed ID: 35178326
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Fusion technique does not affect short-term patient-reported outcomes for lumbar degenerative disease.
    Divi SN; Schroeder GD; Goyal DKC; Radcliff KE; Galetta MS; Hilibrand AS; Anderson DG; Kurd MF; Rihn JA; Kaye ID; Woods BR; Vaccaro AR; Kepler CK
    Spine J; 2019 Dec; 19(12):1960-1968. PubMed ID: 31356987
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Expandable vs Static Cages in Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Radiographic Comparison of Segmental and Lumbar Sagittal Angles.
    Yee TJ; Joseph JR; Terman SW; Park P
    Neurosurgery; 2017 Jul; 81(1):69-74. PubMed ID: 28368542
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Expandable spacers provide better functional outcomes than static spacers in minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.
    Kremer MA; Alferink J; Wynsma S; Shirk T; Ledonio C
    J Spine Surg; 2019 Sep; 5(3):315-319. PubMed ID: 31663042
    [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. Expandable Polyaryl-Ether-Ether-Ketone Spacers for Interbody Distraction in the Lumbar Spine.
    Alimi M; Shin B; Macielak M; Hofstetter CP; Njoku I; Tsiouris AJ; Elowitz E; Härtl R
    Global Spine J; 2015 Jun; 5(3):169-78. PubMed ID: 26131383
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.