127 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37661347)
1. The MOTION study: Two-year results of a real-world randomized controlled trial of the mild® procedure for treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis.
Deer TR; Chafin TB; Costandi SJ; Qu H; Kim C; Jassal N; Patel K; Calodney A
Pain Pract; 2024 Jan; 24(1):109-119. PubMed ID: 37661347
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The MOTION Study: A Randomized Controlled Trial with Objective Real-World Outcomes for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Patients Treated with the mild® Procedure: One-Year Results.
Deer TR; Costandi SJ; Washabaugh E; Chafin TB; Wahezi SE; Jassal N; Sayed D
Pain Med; 2022 Apr; 23(4):625-634. PubMed ID: 35167700
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. MILD® Is an Effective Treatment for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis with Neurogenic Claudication: MiDAS ENCORE Randomized Controlled Trial.
Benyamin RM; Staats PS; MiDAS Encore I
Pain Physician; 2016 May; 19(4):229-42. PubMed ID: 27228511
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Long-Term Safety and Efficacy of Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression Procedure for the Treatment of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis With Neurogenic Claudication: 2-Year Results of MiDAS ENCORE.
Staats PS; Chafin TB; Golovac S; Kim CK; Li S; Richardson WB; Vallejo R; Wahezi SE; Washabaugh EP; Benyamin RM;
Reg Anesth Pain Med; 2018 Oct; 43(7):789-794. PubMed ID: 30199512
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. MiDAS ENCORE: Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial Report of 6-Month Results.
Staats PS; Benyamin RM;
Pain Physician; 2016 Feb; 19(2):25-38. PubMed ID: 26815247
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Objective Real-World Outcomes of Patients Suffering from Painful Neurogenic Claudication Treated with the
Deer T; Kim C; Wahezi SE; Qu H; Sayed D;
J Pain Res; 2021; 14():1687-1697. PubMed ID: 34140805
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. MiDAS ENCORE: Randomized Controlled Study Design and Protocol.
Benyamin RM; Staats PS
Pain Physician; 2015; 18(4):307-16. PubMed ID: 26218933
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Long-term results of percutaneous lumbar decompression mild(®) for spinal stenosis.
Mekhail N; Vallejo R; Coleman MH; Benyamin RM
Pain Pract; 2012 Mar; 12(3):184-93. PubMed ID: 21676166
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Functional and patient-reported outcomes in symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis following percutaneous decompression.
Mekhail N; Costandi S; Abraham B; Samuel SW
Pain Pract; 2012 Jul; 12(6):417-25. PubMed ID: 22651852
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Prospective, randomized, multicenter study with 2-year follow-up to compare the performance of decompression with and without interlaminar stabilization.
Schmidt S; Franke J; Rauschmann M; Adelt D; Bonsanto MM; Sola S
J Neurosurg Spine; 2018 Apr; 28(4):406-415. PubMed ID: 29372860
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Study of percutaneous lumbar decompression and treatment algorithm for patients suffering from neurogenic claudication.
Deer TR; Kim CK; Bowman RG; Ranson MT; Yee BS
Pain Physician; 2012; 15(6):451-60. PubMed ID: 23159960
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Five-year results of a clinical pilot study utilizing a pedicle-lengthening osteotomy for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis.
Mlyavykh S; Ludwig SC; Kepler CK; Anderson DG
J Neurosurg Spine; 2018 Sep; 29(3):241-249. PubMed ID: 29856305
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. MiDAS I (mild Decompression Alternative to Open Surgery): a preliminary report of a prospective, multi-center clinical study.
Chopko B; Caraway DL
Pain Physician; 2010; 13(4):369-78. PubMed ID: 20648206
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Minimally invasive direct decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis: impact of multiple prior epidural steroid injections.
Pryzbylkowski P; Bux A; Chandwani K; Khemlani V; Puri S; Rosenberg J; Sukumaran H
Pain Manag; 2022 Mar; 12(2):149-158. PubMed ID: 34344197
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Percutaneous image-guided lumbar decompression and interspinous spacers for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis: A 2-year Medicare Claims Benchmark Study.
Staats PS; Hagedorn JM; Reece DE; Strand NH; Poree L
Pain Pract; 2023 Sep; 23(7):776-784. PubMed ID: 37254613
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. mild Interlaminar decompression for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis: procedure description and case series with 1-year follow-up.
Wong WH
Clin J Pain; 2012 Jul; 28(6):534-8. PubMed ID: 22673487
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Decompression alone vs. decompression plus fusion for claudication secondary to lumbar spinal stenosis.
Thomas K; Faris P; McIntosh G; Manners S; Abraham E; Bailey CS; Paquet J; Cadotte D; Jacobs WB; Rampersaud YR; Manson NA; Hall H; Fisher CG
Spine J; 2019 Oct; 19(10):1633-1639. PubMed ID: 31195133
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Long-term results of percutaneous lumbar decompression for LSS: two-year outcomes.
Chopko BW
Clin J Pain; 2013 Nov; 29(11):939-43. PubMed ID: 23446067
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Interspinous process device versus standard conventional surgical decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis: randomized controlled trial.
Moojen WA; Arts MP; Jacobs WC; van Zwet EW; van den Akker-van Marle ME; Koes BW; Vleggeert-Lankamp CL; Peul WC;
BMJ; 2013 Nov; 347():f6415. PubMed ID: 24231273
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The durability of minimally invasive lumbar decompression procedure in patients with symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis: Long-term follow-up.
Mekhail N; Costandi S; Nageeb G; Ekladios C; Saied O
Pain Pract; 2021 Nov; 21(8):826-835. PubMed ID: 33942964
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
