134 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34989877)
1. Accuracy and agreement of national spine register data for 474 patients compared to corresponding electronic patient records.
Alhaug OK; Kaur S; Dolatowski F; Småstuen MC; Solberg TK; Lønne G
Eur Spine J; 2022 Mar; 31(3):801-811. PubMed ID: 34989877
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Postoperative complications after surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis, assessment using two different data sources.
Alhaug OK; Dolatowski FC; Kaur S; Lønne G
Acta Neurochir (Wien); 2024 Apr; 166(1):189. PubMed ID: 38653826
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Excellent agreement of Norwegian trauma registry data compared to corresponding data in electronic patient records.
Naberezhneva N; Uleberg O; Dahlhaug M; Giil-Jensen V; Ringdal KG; Røise O
Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med; 2023 Sep; 31(1):50. PubMed ID: 37752614
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Interrater and intrarater agreements of magnetic resonance imaging findings in the lumbar spine: significant variability across degenerative conditions.
Fu MC; Buerba RA; Long WD; Blizzard DJ; Lischuk AW; Haims AH; Grauer JN
Spine J; 2014 Oct; 14(10):2442-8. PubMed ID: 24642053
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Retrospective analysis of accuracy and positive predictive value of preoperative lumbar MRI grading after successful outcome following outpatient endoscopic decompression for lumbar foraminal and lateral recess stenosis.
Lewandrowski KU
Clin Neurol Neurosurg; 2019 Apr; 179():74-80. PubMed ID: 30870712
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Qualitative versus quantitative lumbar spinal stenosis grading by machine learning supported texture analysis-Experience from the LSOS study cohort.
Huber FA; Stutz S; Vittoria de Martini I; Mannil M; Becker AS; Winklhofer S; Burgstaller JM; Guggenberger R
Eur J Radiol; 2019 May; 114():45-50. PubMed ID: 31005175
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Clinical outcome after surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis in patients with insignificant lower extremity pain. A prospective cohort study from the Norwegian registry for spine surgery.
Hermansen E; Myklebust TÅ; Austevoll IM; Rekeland F; Solberg T; Storheim K; Grundnes O; Aaen J; Brox JI; Hellum C; Indrekvam K
BMC Musculoskelet Disord; 2019 Jan; 20(1):36. PubMed ID: 30669998
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Reliability of preoperative MRI findings in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis.
Banitalebi H; Espeland A; Anvar M; Hermansen E; Hellum C; Brox JI; Myklebust TÅ; Indrekvam K; Brisby H; Weber C; Aaen J; Austevoll IM; Grundnes O; Negård A
BMC Musculoskelet Disord; 2022 Jan; 23(1):51. PubMed ID: 35033042
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Deep Learning Model for Automated Detection and Classification of Central Canal, Lateral Recess, and Neural Foraminal Stenosis at Lumbar Spine MRI.
Hallinan JTPD; Zhu L; Yang K; Makmur A; Algazwi DAR; Thian YL; Lau S; Choo YS; Eide SE; Yap QV; Chan YH; Tan JH; Kumar N; Ooi BC; Yoshioka H; Quek ST
Radiology; 2021 Jul; 300(1):130-138. PubMed ID: 33973835
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Degenerative lumbar spinal canal stenosis: intra- and inter-reader agreement for magnetic resonance imaging parameters.
Winklhofer S; Held U; Burgstaller JM; Finkenstaedt T; Bolog N; Ulrich N; Steurer J; Andreisek G; Del Grande F
Eur Spine J; 2017 Feb; 26(2):353-361. PubMed ID: 27334492
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Reliability of readings of magnetic resonance imaging features of lumbar spinal stenosis.
Lurie JD; Tosteson AN; Tosteson TD; Carragee E; Carrino JA; Kaiser J; Sequeiros RT; Lecomte AR; Grove MR; Blood EA; Pearson LH; Weinstein JN; Herzog R
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2008 Jun; 33(14):1605-10. PubMed ID: 18552677
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Criteria for failure and worsening after surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis: a prospective national spine registry observational study.
Alhaug OK; Dolatowski FC; Solberg TK; Lønne G
Spine J; 2021 Sep; 21(9):1489-1496. PubMed ID: 33848690
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Does surgical technique influence clinical outcome after lumbar spinal stenosis decompression? A comparative effectiveness study from the Norwegian Registry for Spine Surgery.
Hermansen E; Romild UK; Austevoll IM; Solberg T; Storheim K; Brox JI; Hellum C; Indrekvam K
Eur Spine J; 2017 Feb; 26(2):420-427. PubMed ID: 27262561
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Could automated machine-learned MRI grading aid epidemiological studies of lumbar spinal stenosis? Validation within the Wakayama spine study.
Ishimoto Y; Jamaludin A; Cooper C; Walker-Bone K; Yamada H; Hashizume H; Oka H; Tanaka S; Yoshimura N; Yoshida M; Urban J; Kadir T; Fairbank J
BMC Musculoskelet Disord; 2020 Mar; 21(1):158. PubMed ID: 32164627
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Microsurgical decompression for central lumbar spinal stenosis: a single-center observational study.
Giannadakis C; Hammersbøen LE; Feyling C; Solheim O; Jakola AS; Nerland US; Nygaard ØP; Solberg TK; Gulati S
Acta Neurochir (Wien); 2015 Jul; 157(7):1165-71. PubMed ID: 26002712
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Does daily tobacco smoking affect outcomes after microdecompression for degenerative central lumbar spinal stenosis? - A multicenter observational registry-based study.
Gulati S; Nordseth T; Nerland US; Gulati M; Weber C; Giannadakis C; Nygaard ØP; Solberg TK; Solheim O; Jakola AS
Acta Neurochir (Wien); 2015 Jul; 157(7):1157-64. PubMed ID: 25943982
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. New MRI grading system for the cervical canal stenosis.
Kang Y; Lee JW; Koh YH; Hur S; Kim SJ; Chai JW; Kang HS
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2011 Jul; 197(1):W134-40. PubMed ID: 21700974
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. MRI of the lumbar spine: comparison of 3D isotropic turbo spin-echo SPACE sequence versus conventional 2D sequences at 3.0 T.
Lee S; Jee WH; Jung JY; Lee SY; Ryu KS; Ha KY
Acta Radiol; 2015 Feb; 56(2):174-81. PubMed ID: 24553584
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Simplified Universal Grading of Lumbar Spine MRI Degenerative Findings: Inter-Reader Agreement of Non-Radiologist Spine Experts.
Miskin N; Isaac Z; Lu Y; Makhni MC; Sarno DL; Smith TR; Zampini JM; Mandell JC
Pain Med; 2021 Jul; 22(7):1485-1495. PubMed ID: 33713135
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Do thoraco-lumbar spinal injuries classification systems exhibit lower inter- and intra-observer agreement than other fractures classifications?: A comparison using fractures of the trochanteric area of the proximal femur as contrast model.
Urrutia J; Zamora T; Klaber I; Carmona M; Palma J; Campos M; Yurac R
Injury; 2016 Apr; 47(4):859-64. PubMed ID: 26653269
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
