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.
6. Comparison of 3D-printed titanium-alloy, standard titanium-alloy, and PEEK interbody spacers in an ovine model. Van Horn MR, Beard R, Wang W, Cunningham BW, Mullinix KP, Allall M, Bucklen BS. Spine J; 2021 Dec; 21(12):2097-2103. PubMed ID: 34029756 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Biomechanical Analysis of Porous Additive Manufactured Cages for Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Finite Element Analysis. Zhang Z, Li H, Fogel GR, Liao Z, Li Y, Liu W. World Neurosurg; 2018 Mar; 111():e581-e591. PubMed ID: 29288855 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Subsidence and fusion performance of a 3D-printed porous interbody cage with stress-optimized body lattice and microporous endplates - a comprehensive mechanical and biological analysis. Fogel G, Martin N, Lynch K, Pelletier MH, Wills D, Wang T, Walsh WR, Williams GM, Malik J, Peng Y, Jekir M. Spine J; 2022 Jun; 22(6):1028-1037. PubMed ID: 35017054 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Porous titanium-6 aluminum-4 vanadium cage has better osseointegration and less micromotion than a poly-ether-ether-ketone cage in sheep vertebral fusion. Wu SH, Li Y, Zhang YQ, Li XK, Yuan CF, Hao YL, Zhang ZY, Guo Z. Artif Organs; 2013 Dec; 37(12):E191-201. PubMed ID: 24147953 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Biomechanical comparison of cervical spine interbody fusion cages. Kandziora F, Pflugmacher R, Schäfer J, Born C, Duda G, Haas NP, Mittlmeier T. Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2001 Sep 01; 26(17):1850-7. PubMed ID: 11568693 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. [Application of a stand-alone interbody fusion cage based on a novel porous TiO2/glass ceramic--2: Biomechanical evaluation after implantation in the sheep cervical spine]. Korinth MC, Hero T, Pandorf T, Zell D. Biomed Tech (Berl); 2005 Apr 01; 50(4):111-8. PubMed ID: 15884708 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Finite element model predicts the biomechanical performance of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with various porous additive manufactured cages. Zhang Z, Li H, Fogel GR, Xiang D, Liao Z, Liu W. Comput Biol Med; 2018 Apr 01; 95():167-174. PubMed ID: 29501735 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Impaction durability of porous polyether-ether-ketone (PEEK) and titanium-coated PEEK interbody fusion devices. Torstrick FB, Klosterhoff BS, Westerlund LE, Foley KT, Gochuico J, Lee CSD, Gall K, Safranski DL. Spine J; 2018 May 01; 18(5):857-865. PubMed ID: 29366985 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. PEEK versus titanium cages in lateral lumbar interbody fusion: a comparative analysis of subsidence. Campbell PG, Cavanaugh DA, Nunley P, Utter PA, Kerr E, Wadhwa R, Stone M. Neurosurg Focus; 2020 Sep 01; 49(3):E10. PubMed ID: 32871573 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] Page: [Next] [New Search]