Format
Items per page
Sort by

Send to:

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 128

1.

Comparative fixation methods of cervical disc arthroplasty versus conventional methods of anterior cervical arthrodesis: serration, teeth, keels, or screws?

Cunningham BW, Hu N, Zorn CM, McAfee PC.

J Neurosurg Spine. 2010 Feb;12(2):214-20. doi: 10.3171/2009.9.SPINE08952.

PMID:
20121359
2.

Screw orientation and plate type (variable- vs. fixed-angle) effect strength of fixation for in vitro biomechanical testing of the Synthes CSLP.

Dipaola CP, Jacobson JA, Awad H, Conrad BP, Rechtine GR 2nd.

Spine J. 2008 Sep-Oct;8(5):717-22. Epub 2007 Nov 5.

PMID:
17983846
3.

Stress analysis of the interface between cervical vertebrae end plates and the Bryan, Prestige LP, and ProDisc-C cervical disc prostheses: an in vivo image-based finite element study.

Lin CY, Kang H, Rouleau JP, Hollister SJ, Marca FL.

Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009 Jul 1;34(15):1554-60. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181aa643b.

PMID:
19564765
4.

Impact of screw location and endplate preparation on pullout strength for anterior plates and integrated fixation cages.

Nagaraja S, Palepu V, Peck JH, Helgeson MD.

Spine J. 2015 Nov 1;15(11):2425-32. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2015.07.454. Epub 2015 Jul 30.

PMID:
26235470
5.

Impact of constrained dual-screw anchorage on holding strength and the resistance to cyclic loading in anterior spinal deformity surgery: a comparative biomechanical study.

Koller H, Fierlbeck J, Auffarth A, Niederberger A, Stephan D, Hitzl W, Augat P, Zenner J, Blocher M, Blocher M, Resch H, Mayer M.

Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2014 Mar 15;39(6):E390-8. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000200.

PMID:
24384666
6.

Cervical disc replacement-porous coated motion prosthesis: a comparative biomechanical analysis showing the key role of the posterior longitudinal ligament.

McAfee PC, Cunningham B, Dmitriev A, Hu N, Woo Kim S, Cappuccino A, Pimenta L.

Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003 Oct 15;28(20):S176-85.

PMID:
14560189
7.

Multilevel cervical arthroplasty with artificial disc replacement.

Cardoso MJ, Rosner MK.

Neurosurg Focus. 2010 May;28(5):E19. doi: 10.3171/2010.1.FOCUS1031.

PMID:
20568935
8.

Biomechanical evaluation of the pullout strength of cervical screws.

Conrad BP, Cordista AG, Horodyski M, Rechtine GR.

J Spinal Disord Tech. 2005 Dec;18(6):506-10.

PMID:
16306839
9.

Failure analysis of C-5 after total disc replacement with ProDisc-C at 1 and 2 levels and in combination with a fusion cage: finite-element and biomechanical models.

Completo A, Nascimento A, Ramos A, Simões J.

J Neurosurg Spine. 2015 Jun;22(6):639-46. doi: 10.3171/2014.10.SPINE14217. Epub 2015 Mar 6.

PMID:
25746118
10.

Biomechanical evaluation of lumbosacral reconstruction techniques for spondylolisthesis: an in vitro porcine model.

Cunningham BW, Lewis SJ, Long J, Dmitriev AE, Linville DA, Bridwell KH.

Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2002 Nov 1;27(21):2321-7.

PMID:
12438979
11.

[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. German.

PMID:
12297957
12.

Biomechanics of an integrated interbody device versus ACDF anterior locking plate in a single-level cervical spine fusion construct.

Stein MI, Nayak AN, Gaskins RB 3rd, Cabezas AF, Santoni BG, Castellvi AE.

Spine J. 2014 Jan;14(1):128-36. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2013.06.088. Epub 2013 Nov 12.

PMID:
24231054
13.

Prospective, randomized, multicenter study of cervical arthroplasty: 269 patients from the Kineflex|C artificial disc investigational device exemption study with a minimum 2-year follow-up: clinical article.

Coric D, Nunley PD, Guyer RD, Musante D, Carmody CN, Gordon CR, Lauryssen C, Ohnmeiss DD, Boltes MO.

J Neurosurg Spine. 2011 Oct;15(4):348-58. doi: 10.3171/2011.5.SPINE10769. Epub 2011 Jun 24. Erratum in: J Neurosurg Spine. 2012 Mar;16(3):322.

PMID:
21699471
15.

Anterior vertebral body screw pullout testing with the hollow modular anchorage system--a comparative in vitro study.

Schramm M, Krummbein S, Kraus H, Pitto RP, Schmidt R.

Biomed Tech (Berl). 2003 Dec;48(12):356-61.

PMID:
14740524
16.

Primary pedicle screw augmentation in osteoporotic lumbar vertebrae: biomechanical analysis of pedicle fixation strength.

Burval DJ, McLain RF, Milks R, Inceoglu S.

Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007 May 1;32(10):1077-83.

PMID:
17471088
17.

Screw pull-out force is dependent on screw orientation in an anterior cervical plate construct.

DiPaola CP, Jacobson JA, Awad H, Conrad BP, Rechtine GR 2nd.

J Spinal Disord Tech. 2007 Jul;20(5):369-73.

PMID:
17607102
18.

Pullout analysis of a lumbar plate with varying screw orientations: experimental and computational analyses.

Rios D, Patacxil WM, Palmer DK, Williams PA, Cheng WK, Inceoğlu S.

Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2012 Jul 15;37(16):E942-8. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318254155a.

PMID:
22433507
19.
20.

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. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2010.01.006.

PMID:
20362252
Format
Items per page
Sort by

Send to:

Choose Destination

Supplemental Content

Write to the Help Desk