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 *

149 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34271544)

  • 1. Does minimally invasive spine surgery improve outcomes in the obese population? A retrospective review of 1442 degenerative lumbar spine surgeries.
    Carroll AH; Dowlati E; Molina E; Zhao D; Altshuler M; Mueller KB; Sandhu FA; Voyadzis JM
    J Neurosurg Spine; 2021 Oct; 35(4):460-470. PubMed ID: 34271544
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Minimally invasive posterior lumbar surgery in the morbidly obese, obese and non-obese populations: A single institution retrospective review.
    Molina E; Zhao D; Dowlati E; Carroll AH; Mueller KB; Sandhu FA; Voyadzis JM
    Clin Neurol Neurosurg; 2021 Aug; 207():106746. PubMed ID: 34144463
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Minimally invasive lumbar decompression-the surgical learning curve.
    Ahn J; Iqbal A; Manning BT; Leblang S; Bohl DD; Mayo BC; Massel DH; Singh K
    Spine J; 2016 Aug; 16(8):909-16. PubMed ID: 26235463
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Impact of obesity on complications and outcomes: a comparison of fusion and nonfusion lumbar spine surgery.
    Onyekwelu I; Glassman SD; Asher AL; Shaffrey CI; Mummaneni PV; Carreon LY
    J Neurosurg Spine; 2017 Feb; 26(2):158-162. PubMed ID: 27740396
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Perioperative outcomes and adverse events of minimally invasive versus open posterior lumbar fusion: meta-analysis and systematic review.
    Goldstein CL; Macwan K; Sundararajan K; Rampersaud YR
    J Neurosurg Spine; 2016 Mar; 24(3):416-27. PubMed ID: 26565767
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Minimally Invasive Versus Open Surgery for Degenerative Spine Disorders for Elderly Patients: Experiences from a Single Institution.
    Yolcu YU; Helal A; Alexander AY; Bhatti AU; Alvi MA; Abode-Iyamah K; Bydon M
    World Neurosurg; 2021 Feb; 146():e1262-e1269. PubMed ID: 33276177
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Comparison of open and minimally invasive techniques for posterior lumbar instrumentation and fusion after open anterior lumbar interbody fusion.
    Kepler CK; Yu AL; Gruskay JA; Delasotta LA; Radcliff KE; Rihn JA; Hilibrand AS; Anderson DG; Vaccaro AR
    Spine J; 2013 May; 13(5):489-97. PubMed ID: 23218509
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The Difference in Surgical Site Infection Rates Between Open and Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery for Degenerative Lumbar Pathology: A Retrospective Single Center Experience of 1442 Cases.
    Mueller K; Zhao D; Johnson O; Sandhu FA; Voyadzis JM
    Oper Neurosurg (Hagerstown); 2019 Jun; 16(6):750-755. PubMed ID: 30107559
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Complication rates associated with open versus percutaneous pedicle screw instrumentation among patients undergoing minimally invasive interbody fusion for adult spinal deformity.
    Than KD; Mummaneni PV; Bridges KJ; Tran S; Park P; Chou D; La Marca F; Uribe JS; Vogel TD; Nunley PD; Eastlack RK; Anand N; Okonkwo DO; Kanter AS; Mundis GM
    Neurosurg Focus; 2017 Dec; 43(6):E7. PubMed ID: 29191098
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: one surgeon's learning curve.
    Nandyala SV; Fineberg SJ; Pelton M; Singh K
    Spine J; 2014 Aug; 14(8):1460-5. PubMed ID: 24290313
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: comparison of clinical outcomes among obese patients.
    Terman SW; Yee TJ; Lau D; Khan AA; La Marca F; Park P
    J Neurosurg Spine; 2014 Jun; 20(6):644-52. PubMed ID: 24745355
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. Reoperation, Readmission, and Discharge Disposition for Patients With Degenerative Lumbar Pathology Treated With Either Open or Minimally Invasive Techniques: A Single-Center Retrospective Review of 1435 Cases.
    Altshuler M; Mueller KB; MacConnell A; Wirth P; Sandhu FA; Voyadzis JM
    Neurosurgery; 2020 Nov; 87(6):1199-1205. PubMed ID: 32542331
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Short-term outcomes of lateral lumbar interbody fusion without decompression for the treatment of symptomatic degenerative spondylolisthesis at L4-5.
    Campbell PG; Nunley PD; Cavanaugh D; Kerr E; Utter PA; Frank K; Stone M
    Neurosurg Focus; 2018 Jan; 44(1):E6. PubMed ID: 29290128
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comparison of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (Mis-TLIF) with bilateral decompression via unilateral approach and open-TLIF with bilateral decompression for degenerative lumbar diseases: a retrospective cohort study.
    Zhu F; Jia D; Zhang Y; Feng C; Ning Y; Leng X; Zhou Y; Li C; Huang B
    J Orthop Surg Res; 2024 Feb; 19(1):150. PubMed ID: 38378729
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.