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 *

116 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37651575)

  • 1. Preoperative Disability Influences Effectiveness of MCID and PASS in Predicting Patient Improvement Following Lumbar Spine Surgery.
    Shahi P; Subramanian T; Maayan O; Araghi K; Singh N; Singh S; Asada T; Tuma O; Korsun M; Sheha E; Dowdell J; Qureshi SA; Iyer S
    Clin Spine Surg; 2023 Dec; 36(10):E506-E511. PubMed ID: 37651575
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. ODI <25 Denotes Patient Acceptable Symptom State After Minimally Invasive Lumbar Spine Surgery.
    Shahi P; Shinn D; Singh N; Subramanian T; Song J; Dalal S; Araghi K; Melissaridou D; Sheha E; Dowdell J; Qureshi SA; Iyer S
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2023 Feb; 48(3):196-202. PubMed ID: 36122296
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Preoperative Disability Influences Effectiveness of Minimal Clinically Important Difference and Patient Acceptable Symptom State in Predicting Patient Improvement Following Cervical Spine Surgery.
    Shahi P; Maayan O; Subramanian T; Singh N; Singh S; Araghi K; Tuma O; Asada T; Korsun M; Sheha E; Dowdell J; Qureshi SA; Iyer S
    Global Spine J; 2023 Nov; ():21925682231215765. PubMed ID: 37984881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Preoperative Oswestry Disability Index Should not be Utilized to Determine Surgical Eligibility for Patients Requiring Lumbar Fusion for Degenerative Lumbar Spine Disease.
    Issa TZ; Haider AA; Lambrechts MJ; Sherman MB; Canseco JA; Vaccaro AR; Schroeder GD; Kepler CK; Hilibrand AS
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2024 Jul; 49(14):965-972. PubMed ID: 38420655
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Poor muscle health and low preoperative ODI are independent predictors for slower achievement of MCID after minimally invasive decompression.
    Singh S; Shahi P; Asada T; Kaidi A; Subramanian T; Zhao E; Kim AYE; Maayan O; Araghi K; Singh N; Tuma O; Korsun M; Kamil R; Sheha E; Dowdell J; Qureshi S; Iyer S
    Spine J; 2023 Aug; 23(8):1152-1160. PubMed ID: 37059307
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Practical answers to frequently asked questions in minimally invasive lumbar spine surgery.
    Shahi P; Vaishnav AS; Mai E; Kim JH; Dalal S; Song J; Shinn DJ; Melissaridou D; Araghi K; Urakawa H; Sivaganesan A; Lafage V; Qureshi SA; Iyer S
    Spine J; 2023 Jan; 23(1):54-63. PubMed ID: 35843537
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Meeting Patient Expectations and Achieving a Minimal Clinically Important Difference for Back Disability, Back Pain, and Leg Pain May Provide Predictive Utility for Achieving Patient Satisfaction Among Lumbar Decompression Patients.
    Jacob KC; Patel MR; Collins AP; Park GJ; Vanjani NN; Prabhu MC; Pawlowski H; Parsons AW; Singh K
    World Neurosurg; 2022 Jun; 162():e328-e335. PubMed ID: 35259504
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. Predictors of achieving minimal clinically important difference in functional status for elderly patients with degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis undergoing lumbar decompression and fusion surgery.
    Hou X; Hu H; Cui P; Kong C; Wang W; Lu S
    BMC Surg; 2024 Feb; 24(1):59. PubMed ID: 38365668
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Risk Factors Associated With Failure to Reach Minimal Clinically Important Difference in Patient-reported Outcomes Following Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Spondylolisthesis.
    Hijji FY; Narain AS; Bohl DD; Yom KH; Kudaravalli KT; Lopez GD; Singh K
    Clin Spine Surg; 2018 Feb; 31(1):E92-E97. PubMed ID: 28538082
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Inadequacy of 3-month Oswestry Disability Index outcome for assessing individual longer-term patient experience after lumbar spine surgery.
    Asher AL; Chotai S; Devin CJ; Speroff T; Harrell FE; Nian H; Dittus RS; Mummaneni PV; Knightly JJ; Glassman SD; Bydon M; Archer KR; Foley KT; McGirt MJ
    J Neurosurg Spine; 2016 Aug; 25(2):170-80. PubMed ID: 26989974
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The Effect of the Severity of Preoperative Disability on Patient-Reported Outcomes and Patient Satisfaction Following Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion.
    Jacob KC; Patel MR; Collins AP; Ribot MA; Pawlowski H; Prabhu MC; Vanjani NN; Singh K
    World Neurosurg; 2022 Mar; 159():e334-e346. PubMed ID: 34942388
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The patient acceptable symptom state for the Oswestry Disability Index following single-level lumbar fusion for degenerative spondylolisthesis.
    Goh GS; Soh RCC; Yue WM; Guo CM; Tan SB; Chen JL
    Spine J; 2021 Apr; 21(4):598-609. PubMed ID: 33221514
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Minimal clinically important difference in patients who underwent decompression alone for lumbar degenerative disease.
    Nakarai H; Kato S; Kawamura N; Higashikawa A; Takeshita Y; Fukushima M; Ono T; Hara N; Azuma S; Tanaka S; Oshima Y
    Spine J; 2022 Apr; 22(4):549-560. PubMed ID: 34699996
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Achievement of a Minimum Clinically Important Difference for Back Disability Is a Suitable Predictor of Patient Satisfaction Among Lumbar Fusion Patients.
    Geoghegan CE; Mohan S; Cha EDK; Lynch CP; Jadczak CN; Singh K
    World Neurosurg; 2021 Aug; 152():e94-e100. PubMed ID: 34023465
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The attainment of a patient acceptable symptom state in patients undergoing revision spine fusion.
    Issa TZ; Tarawneh OH; Ezeonu T; Haider AA; Narayanan R; Canseco JA; Hilibrand AS; Vaccaro AR; Schroeder GD; Kepler CK
    Eur Spine J; 2024 Sep; 33(9):3516-3522. PubMed ID: 38913182
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The Minimum Clinically Important Difference for Patient Health Questionnaire-9 in Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Interbody Fusion.
    Lynch CP; Cha EDK; Jenkins NW; Parrish JM; Mohan S; Jadczak CN; Geoghegan CE; Singh K
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2021 May; 46(9):603-609. PubMed ID: 33290370
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Patient-reported outcomes after minimally invasive sacro-iliac joint surgery: a cohort study based on the Swedish Spine Registry.
    Randers EM; Kibsgård TJ; Stuge B; Westberg A; Sigmundsson FG; Joelson A; Gerdhem P
    Acta Orthop; 2024 Jun; 95():284-289. PubMed ID: 38874434
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Influence of Preoperative 12-Item Short Form Mental Composite Score on Clinical Outcomes in an Isthmic Spondylolisthesis Population Undergoing Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion.
    Patel MR; Jacob KC; Patel SD; Prabhu MC; Vanjani NN; Pawlowski H; Singh K
    World Neurosurg; 2022 Feb; 158():e1022-e1030. PubMed ID: 34906755
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The Effect of Preoperative Symptom Duration on Postoperative Outcomes After Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion.
    Yoo JS; Patel DS; Hrynewycz NM; Brundage TS; Mogilevsky FA; Singh K
    Clin Spine Surg; 2020 Jul; 33(6):E263-E268. PubMed ID: 31503049
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.