Literature DB >> 1927344

[Surgery of the intervertebral ligaments, alternative to arthrodesis in the treatment of degenerative instabilities].

J Senegas1.   

Abstract

Mesh：

Year:  1991        PMID： 1927344

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Orthop Belg        ISSN： 0001-6462            Impact factor:   0.500


× No keyword cloud information.
  9 in total

1.  Clinical evaluation of a lumbar interspinous dynamic stabilization device (the Wallis system) with a 13-year mean follow-up.

Authors:  Jacques Sénégas; Jean-Marc Vital; Vincent Pointillart; Paolo Mangione
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2009-04-22       Impact factor: 3.042

2.  IPD without bony decompression versus conventional surgical decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis: 2-year results of a double-blind randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Wouter A Moojen; Mark P Arts; Wilco C H Jacobs; Erik W van Zwet; M Elske van den Akker-van Marle; Bart W Koes; Carmen Lam Vleggeert-Lankamp; Wilco C Peul
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-01-14       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Minimally invasive surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  Wouter A Moojen; Niels A Van der Gaag
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2016-09-22

4.  A prospective randomized multi-center study for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis with the X STOP interspinous implant: 1-year results.

Authors:  J F Zucherman; K Y Hsu; C A Hartjen; T F Mehalic; D A Implicito; M J Martin; D R Johnson; G A Skidmore; P P Vessa; J W Dwyer; S Puccio; J C Cauthen; R M Ozuna
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2003-12-19       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  The Felix-trial. Double-blind randomization of interspinous implant or bony decompression for treatment of spinal stenosis related intermittent neurogenic claudication.

Authors:  Wouter A Moojen; Mark P Arts; Ronald Brand; Bart W Koes; Wilco C Peul
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2010-05-27       Impact factor: 2.362

6.  The effect of dynamic, semi-rigid implants on the range of motion of lumbar motion segments after decompression.

Authors:  Tobias L Schulte; Christof Hurschler; Marcel Haversath; Ulf Liljenqvist; Viola Bullmann; Timm J Filler; Nani Osada; Eva-Maria Fallenberg; Lars Hackenberg
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2008-05-21       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  Interspinous process spacers versus traditional decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Kevin Phan; Prashanth J Rao; Jonathon R Ball; Ralph J Mobbs
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2016-03

8.  Interspinous process device versus standard conventional surgical decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis: randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Wouter A Moojen; Mark P Arts; Wilco C H Jacobs; Erik W van Zwet; M Elske van den Akker-van Marle; Bart W Koes; Carmen L A M Vleggeert-Lankamp; Wilco C Peul
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2013-11-14

9.  Lumbar spinal canal dimensions measured intraoperatively after decompression are not properly rendered on early postoperative MRI.

Authors:  Catharina Schenck; Job van Susante; Maarten van Gorp; Ruben Belder; Carmen Vleggeert-Lankamp
Journal:  Acta Neurochir (Wien)       Date:  2016-03-23       Impact factor: 2.216
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.