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 *

148 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38913182)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. Revision lumbar fusions have higher rates of reoperation and result in worse clinical outcomes compared to primary lumbar fusions.
    Lambrechts MJ; Toci GR; Siegel N; Karamian BA; Canseco JA; Hilibrand AS; Schroeder GD; Vaccaro AR; Kepler CK
    Spine J; 2023 Jan; 23(1):105-115. PubMed ID: 36064090
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Preoperative Zung Depression Scale predicts outcome after revision lumbar surgery for adjacent segment disease, recurrent stenosis, and pseudarthrosis.
    Adogwa O; Parker SL; Shau DN; Mendenhall SK; Aaronson OS; Cheng JS; Devin CJ; McGirt MJ
    Spine J; 2012 Mar; 12(3):179-85. PubMed ID: 21937282
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Revision lumbar surgery in elderly patients with symptomatic pseudarthrosis, adjacent-segment disease, or same-level recurrent stenosis. Part 1. Two-year outcomes and clinical efficacy: clinical article.
    Adogwa O; Carr RK; Kudyba K; Karikari I; Bagley CA; Gokaslan ZL; Theodore N; Cheng JS
    J Neurosurg Spine; 2013 Feb; 18(2):139-46. PubMed ID: 23231354
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Determination of minimum clinically important difference in pain, disability, and quality of life after extension of fusion for adjacent-segment disease.
    Parker SL; Mendenhall SK; Shau D; Adogwa O; Cheng JS; Anderson WN; Devin CJ; McGirt MJ
    J Neurosurg Spine; 2012 Jan; 16(1):61-7. PubMed ID: 21962034
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Affective disorders influence clinical outcomes after revision lumbar surgery in elderly patients with symptomatic adjacent-segment disease, recurrent stenosis, or pseudarthrosis: clinical article.
    Adogwa O; Verla T; Thompson P; Penumaka A; Kudyba K; Johnson K; Fulchiero E; Miller T; Hoang KB; Cheng J; Bagley CA
    J Neurosurg Spine; 2014 Aug; 21(2):153-9. PubMed ID: 24836659
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Lumbar fusion outcomes stratified by specific diagnostic indication.
    Glassman SD; Carreon LY; Djurasovic M; Dimar JR; Johnson JR; Puno RM; Campbell MJ
    Spine J; 2009; 9(1):13-21. PubMed ID: 18805059
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Revision lumbar surgery in elderly patients with symptomatic pseudarthrosis, adjacent-segment disease, or same-level recurrent stenosis. Part 2. A cost-effectiveness analysis: clinical article.
    Adogwa O; Owens R; Karikari I; Agarwal V; Gottfried ON; Bagley CA; Isaacs RE; Cheng JS
    J Neurosurg Spine; 2013 Feb; 18(2):147-53. PubMed ID: 23231358
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Reassessing the minimum 2-year follow-up standard after lumbar decompression surgery: a 2-month follow-up seems to be an acceptable minimum.
    Calek AK; Hochreiter B; Buckland AJ
    Spine J; 2024 Jul; 24(7):1244-1252. PubMed ID: 38588722
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Minimum clinically important difference in pain, disability, and quality of life after neural decompression and fusion for same-level recurrent lumbar stenosis: understanding clinical versus statistical significance.
    Parker SL; Mendenhall SK; Shau DN; Adogwa O; Anderson WN; Devin CJ; McGirt MJ
    J Neurosurg Spine; 2012 May; 16(5):471-8. PubMed ID: 22324801
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Reoperation rates and risk factors for revision 4 years after dynamic stabilization of the lumbar spine.
    Rienmüller AC; Krieg SM; Schmidt FA; Meyer EL; Meyer B
    Spine J; 2019 Jan; 19(1):113-120. PubMed ID: 29886162
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Long-term outcomes after revision neural decompression and fusion for same-level recurrent lumbar stenosis: defining the effectiveness of surgery.
    Mendenhall SK; Parker SL; Adogwa O; Shau DN; Cheng J; Aaronson O; Devin CJ; McGirt MJ
    J Spinal Disord Tech; 2014 Oct; 27(7):353-7. PubMed ID: 25247253
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Long-term durability of minimal invasive posterior transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a clinical and radiographic follow-up.
    Rouben D; Casnellie M; Ferguson M
    J Spinal Disord Tech; 2011 Jul; 24(5):288-96. PubMed ID: 20975594
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. Does Wallis implant reduce adjacent segment degeneration above lumbosacral instrumented fusion?
    Korovessis P; Repantis T; Zacharatos S; Zafiropoulos A
    Eur Spine J; 2009 Jun; 18(6):830-40. PubMed ID: 19387697
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.