120 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38301903)
1. Influence of cervical total disc replacement on motion in the target and adjacent segments.
Vogt M; Mehren C; Hackenbroch C; Wilke HJ
Spine J; 2024 Jul; 24(7):1313-1322. PubMed ID: 38301903
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The move-C cervical artificial disc can restore intact range of motion and 3-D kinematics.
Vogt M; Zengerle L; Jonas R; Wilke HJ
Spine J; 2024 Feb; 24(2):340-351. PubMed ID: 37660895
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Examination of cervical spine kinematics in complex, multiplanar motions after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion and total disc replacement.
Daniels AH; Paller DJ; Feller RJ; Thakur NA; Biercevicz AM; Palumbo MA; Crisco JJ; Madom IA
Int J Spine Surg; 2012; 6():190-4. PubMed ID: 25694890
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Kinematic evaluation of one- and two-level Maverick lumbar total disc replacement caudal to a long thoracolumbar spinal fusion.
Zhu Q; Itshayek E; Jones CF; Schwab T; Larson CR; Lenke LG; Cripton PA
Eur Spine J; 2012 Jun; 21 Suppl 5(Suppl 5):S599-611. PubMed ID: 22531900
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Biomechanical comparison of single- and two-level cervical arthroplasty versus arthrodesis: effect on adjacent-level spinal kinematics.
Cunningham BW; Hu N; Zorn CM; McAfee PC
Spine J; 2010 Apr; 10(4):341-9. PubMed ID: 20362252
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Effect of two-level total disc replacement on cervical spine kinematics.
Phillips FM; Tzermiadianos MN; Voronov LI; Havey RM; Carandang G; Dooris A; Patwardhan AG
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2009 Oct; 34(22):E794-9. PubMed ID: 19829242
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Kinematics of cervical total disc replacement adjacent to a two-level, straight versus lordotic fusion.
Martin S; Ghanayem AJ; Tzermiadianos MN; Voronov LI; Havey RM; Renner SM; Carandang G; Abjornson C; Patwardhan AG
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2011 Aug; 36(17):1359-66. PubMed ID: 21629170
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Disc replacement adjacent to cervical fusion: a biomechanical comparison of hybrid construct versus two-level fusion.
Lee MJ; Dumonski M; Phillips FM; Voronov LI; Renner SM; Carandang G; Havey RM; Patwardhan AG
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2011 Nov; 36(23):1932-9. PubMed ID: 21289581
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Total Disk Replacement Adjacent to a Multilevel Fusion in the Cervical Spine: A Biomechanical Motion Analysis.
Segal DN; Grabel ZJ; Wilson JM; Milby AH; Shi WJ; Hutton WC; Rhee JM
World Neurosurg; 2019 Feb; 122():e881-e889. PubMed ID: 30391767
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Biomechanical Analysis of Cervical Disc Replacement and Fusion Using Single Level, Two Level, and Hybrid Constructs.
Gandhi AA; Kode S; DeVries NA; Grosland NM; Smucker JD; Fredericks DC
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2015 Oct; 40(20):1578-85. PubMed ID: 26165217
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Biomechanical evaluation of adjacent segment degeneration after one- or two-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion versus cervical disc arthroplasty: A finite element analysis.
Hua W; Zhi J; Wang B; Ke W; Sun W; Yang S; Li L; Yang C
Comput Methods Programs Biomed; 2020 Jun; 189():105352. PubMed ID: 31991316
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Motion response of a polycrystalline diamond adaptive axis of rotation cervical total disc arthroplasty.
Havey RM; Khayatzadeh S; Voronov LI; Blank KR; Carandang G; Harding DP; Patwardhan AG
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2019 Feb; 62():34-41. PubMed ID: 30665037
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Biomechanical evaluation of a novel biomimetic artificial intervertebral disc in canine cervical cadaveric spines.
Jacobs CAM; Doodkorte RJP; Kamali SA; Abdelgawad AM; Ghazanfari S; Jockenhoevel S; Arts JJC; Tryfonidou MA; Meij BP; Ito K
JOR Spine; 2023 Jun; 6(2):e1251. PubMed ID: 37361332
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Biomechanical comparison of adjacent segmental motion after ventral cervical fixation with varying angles of lordosis.
Hwang SH; Kayanja M; Milks RA; Benzel EC
Spine J; 2007; 7(2):216-21. PubMed ID: 17321972
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The effect of posterior decompressive procedures on segmental range of motion after cervical total disc arthroplasty.
Brody MJ; Patel AA; Ghanayem AJ; Wojewnik B; Carandang G; Havey RM; Voronov LI; Vastardis G; Potluri T; Patwardhan AG
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2014 Sep; 39(19):1558-63. PubMed ID: 24979138
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Effect of multilevel lumbar disc arthroplasty on the operative- and adjacent-level kinematics and intradiscal pressures: an in vitro human cadaveric assessment.
Dmitriev AE; Gill NW; Kuklo TR; Rosner MK
Spine J; 2008; 8(6):918-25. PubMed ID: 18178528
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Biomechanical evaluation of a low profile, anchored cervical interbody spacer device in the setting of progressive flexion-distraction injury of the cervical spine.
Wojewnik B; Ghanayem AJ; Tsitsopoulos PP; Voronov LI; Potluri T; Havey RM; Zelenakova J; Patel AA; Carandang G; Patwardhan AG
Eur Spine J; 2013 Jan; 22(1):135-41. PubMed ID: 22850940
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Motion changes in adjacent segments due to moderate and severe degeneration in C5-C6 disc: a poroelastic C3-T1 finite element model study.
Hussain M; Natarajan RN; An HS; Andersson GB
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2010 Apr; 35(9):939-47. PubMed ID: 20375779
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. In vivo three-dimensional intervertebral kinematics of the subaxial cervical spine during seated axial rotation and lateral bending via a fluoroscopy-to-CT registration approach.
Lin CC; Lu TW; Wang TM; Hsu CY; Hsu SJ; Shih TF
J Biomech; 2014 Oct; 47(13):3310-7. PubMed ID: 25218506
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Biomechanical evaluation of a metal-on-metal cervical intervertebral disc prosthesis.
Colle KO; Butler JB; Reyes PM; Newcomb AG; Theodore N; Crawford NR
Spine J; 2013 Nov; 13(11):1640-9. PubMed ID: 24094992
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
