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.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

510 related items for PubMed ID: 18679101

  • 21.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 22. [Experimental fusion of the sheep cervical spine. Part I: Effect of cage design on interbody fusion].
    Kandziora F, Pflugmacher R, Scholz M, Schäfer J, Schollmeier G, Schnake KJ, Bail H, Duda G, Haas NP.
    Chirurg; 2002 Sep; 73(9):909-17. PubMed ID: 12297957
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 23. Influence of screw positioning in a new anterior spine fixator on implant loosening in osteoporotic vertebrae.
    Reinhold M, Schwieger K, Goldhahn J, Linke B, Knop C, Blauth M.
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2006 Feb 15; 31(4):406-13. PubMed ID: 16481950
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 24. Biomechanical effects of polyaxial pedicle screw fixation on the lumbosacral segments with an anterior interbody cage support.
    Chen SH, Mo Lin R, Chen HH, Tsai KJ.
    BMC Musculoskelet Disord; 2007 Mar 10; 8():28. PubMed ID: 17349057
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 25. Adjacent segment motion after a simulated lumbar fusion in different sagittal alignments: a biomechanical analysis.
    Akamaru T, Kawahara N, Tim Yoon S, Minamide A, Su Kim K, Tomita K, Hutton WC.
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2003 Jul 15; 28(14):1560-6. PubMed ID: 12865845
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 26. New rod-plate anterior instrumentation for thoracolumbar/lumbar scoliosis: biomechanical evaluation compared with dual-rod and single-rod with structural interbody support.
    Zhang H, Johnston CE, Pierce WA, Ashman RB, Bronson DG, Haideri NF.
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2006 Dec 01; 31(25):E934-40. PubMed ID: 17139209
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 27. [Biomechanical aspects of surgical treatment of secondary stenosis of the spinal canal in the lumbosacral region].
    Król R.
    Ann Acad Med Stetin; 1992 Dec 01; 38():97-112. PubMed ID: 1290356
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 28.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 29.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 30. Resistance of the lumbar spine against axial compression forces after implantation of three different posterior lumbar interbody cages.
    Krammer M, Dietl R, Lumenta CB, Kettler A, Wilke HJ, Büttner A, Claes L.
    Acta Neurochir (Wien); 2001 Dec 01; 143(12):1217-22. PubMed ID: 11810385
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 31. Biomechanical analysis of cages for posterior lumbar interbody fusion.
    Fantigrossi A, Galbusera F, Raimondi MT, Sassi M, Fornari M.
    Med Eng Phys; 2007 Jan 01; 29(1):101-9. PubMed ID: 16563847
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 32. Design and finite-element evaluation of a versatile assembled lumbar interbody fusion cage.
    Ding JY, Qian S, Wan L, Huang B, Wang LG, Zhou Y.
    Arch Orthop Trauma Surg; 2010 Apr 01; 130(4):565-71. PubMed ID: 20140621
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 33. Biomechanical comparison of instrumented posterior lumbar interbody fusion with one or two cages by finite element analysis.
    Chiang MF, Zhong ZC, Chen CS, Cheng CK, Shih SL.
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2006 Sep 01; 31(19):E682-9. PubMed ID: 16946641
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 34. Is one cage enough in posterior lumbar interbody fusion: a comparison of unilateral single cage interbody fusion to bilateral cages.
    Fogel GR, Toohey JS, Neidre A, Brantigan JW.
    J Spinal Disord Tech; 2007 Feb 01; 20(1):60-5. PubMed ID: 17285054
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 35. Analysis of pedicle and translaminar facet fixation in a multisegment interbody fusion model.
    Eskander M, Brooks D, Ordway N, Dale E, Connolly P.
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2007 Apr 01; 32(7):E230-5. PubMed ID: 17414898
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 36. Stabilizing potential of anterior, posterior, and circumferential fixation for multilevel cervical arthrodesis: an in vitro human cadaveric study of the operative and adjacent segment kinematics.
    Dmitriev AE, Kuklo TR, Lehman RA, Rosner MK.
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2007 Mar 15; 32(6):E188-96. PubMed ID: 17413459
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 37. Unilateral and bilateral sacropelvic fixation result in similar construct biomechanics.
    Tomlinson T, Chen J, Upasani V, Mahar A.
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2008 Sep 15; 33(20):2127-33. PubMed ID: 18794753
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 38. Revision lumbar arthrodesis for the treatment of lumbar cage pseudoarthrosis: complications.
    Santos ER, Pinto MR, Lonstein JE, Denis F, Garvey TA, Perra JH, Transfeldt EE, Schwender JD.
    J Spinal Disord Tech; 2008 Aug 15; 21(6):418-21. PubMed ID: 18679097
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 39. Biomechanical analysis of unilateral fixation with interbody cages.
    Chen HH, Cheung HH, Wang WK, Li A, Li KC.
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2005 Feb 15; 30(4):E92-6. PubMed ID: 15706329
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 40. Basic scientific considerations in total disc arthroplasty.
    Cunningham BW.
    Spine J; 2004 Feb 15; 4(6 Suppl):219S-230S. PubMed ID: 15541670
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Previous] [Next] [New Search]
    of 26.