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.
5. Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using Expandable Cages: Increased Risk of Late Postoperative Subsidence Without a Real Improvement of Perioperative Outcomes: A Clinical Monocentric Study. Armocida D; Pesce A; Cimatti M; Proietti L; Santoro A; Frati A World Neurosurg; 2021 Dec; 156():e57-e63. PubMed ID: 34492389 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Does loss of spondylolisthesis reduction impact clinical and radiographic outcomes after minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion? Steinhaus ME; Vaishnav AS; Shah SP; Clark NJ; Chaudhary CB; Othman YA; Urakawa H; Samuel AM; Lovecchio FC; Sheha ED; McAnany SJ; Qureshi SA Spine J; 2022 Jan; 22(1):95-103. PubMed ID: 34118417 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. Decompression of Lumbar Central Spinal Canal Stenosis Following Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion. Khalifeh JM; Massie LW; Dibble CF; Dorward IG; Macki M; Khandpur U; Alshohatee K; Jain D; Chang V; Ray WZ Clin Spine Surg; 2021 Oct; 34(8):E439-E449. PubMed ID: 33979102 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Biomechanical analysis of an expandable lateral cage and a static transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion cage with posterior instrumentation in an in vitro spondylolisthesis model. Mantell M; Cyriac M; Haines CM; Gudipally M; O'Brien JR J Neurosurg Spine; 2016 Jan; 24(1):32-8. PubMed ID: 26384133 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. Assessing the Difference in Clinical and Radiologic Outcomes Between Expandable Cage and Nonexpandable Cage Among Patients Undergoing Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Interbody Fusion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Alvi MA; Kurian SJ; Wahood W; Goyal A; Elder BD; Bydon M World Neurosurg; 2019 Jul; 127():596-606.e1. PubMed ID: 30954733 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Static Versus Expandable Polyether Ether Ketone (PEEK) Interbody Cages: A Comparison of One-Year Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes for One-Level Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion. Canseco JA; Karamian BA; DiMaria SL; Patel PD; Divi SN; Chang M; Timmons T; Grewal L; Hallman H; Lee JK; Kaye ID; Woods BI; Kurd MF; Anderson DG; Rihn JA; Hilibrand AS; Kepler CK; Vaccaro AR; Schroeder GD World Neurosurg; 2021 Aug; 152():e492-e501. PubMed ID: 34098137 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Comparison of Outcomes between Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Single-Level Lumbar Spondylolisthesis. Han XG; Tang GQ; Han X; Xing YG; Zhang Q; He D; Tian W Orthop Surg; 2021 Oct; 13(7):2093-2101. PubMed ID: 34596342 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. 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]
18. Retrospective Review of Immediate Restoration of Lordosis in Single-Level Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Comparison of Static and Expandable Interbody Cages. Vaishnav AS; Saville P; McAnany S; Kirnaz S; Wipplinger C; Navarro-Ramirez R; Hartl R; Yang J; Gang CH; Qureshi SA Oper Neurosurg (Hagerstown); 2020 May; 18(5):518-523. PubMed ID: 31504846 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. [Treatment of grade I and II degree degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis with minimally invasive surgery-transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion under Quadrant channel]. Wen J; Yang Y; Zhang H; Liu L; Liu YL; Liu Y; Wang D; Wang ZP Zhongguo Gu Shang; 2019 Mar; 32(3):199-206. PubMed ID: 30921999 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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] [Next] [New Search]