 |
|
Static versus Expandable Interbody Fusion Devices: A Comparison of 1-Year Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes in Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion
Jonathan Andrew Ledesma, Mark J. Lambrechts, Azra Dees, Terence Thomas, Cannon Greco Hiranaka, Mark Faisal Kurd, Kris E. Radcliff, David Greg Anderson
Asian Spine J. 2023;17(1):61-74. Published online 2022 Jul 4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.31616/asj.2021.0486
|
|
Citations to this article as recorded by
 Intradiscal Osteotomy and Bilateral Expandable Transforaminal Interbody Fusion Cages for Iatrogenic Kyphotic Deformity: A Technical Report
Joseph S. Hudson, Andrew Legarreta, Daryl P. Fields, Hansen Deng, David J. McCarthy, Roberta Sefcik, Nitin Agarwal, David K. Hamilton
Asian Journal of Neurosurgery.2024; 19(02): 317. CrossRef Innovative Developments in Lumbar Interbody Cage Materials and Design: A Comprehensive Narrative Review
Sam Yeol Chang, Dong-Ho Kang, Samuel K. Cho
Asian Spine Journal.2024; 18(3): 444. CrossRef Comparison of the Radiographic and Clinical Outcomes Between Expandable Cage and Static Cage for Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Yu-Hsiang Su, Po-Kuan Wu, Meng-Huang Wu, Kin-Weng Wong, Wen-Wei Li, Shih-Hsiang Chou
World Neurosurgery.2023; 179: 133. CrossRef Feasibility and safety of a CaO-SiO2-P2O5-B2O3 bioactive glass ceramic spacer in posterior lumbar interbody fusion compared with polyetheretherketone cage: a prospective randomized controlled trial
Byung-Taek Kwon, Ho-Joong Kim, Sanghoon Lee, Sang-Min Park, Dae-Woong Ham, Hyun-Jin Park, Ohsang Kwon, Jin S. Yeom
Acta Neurochirurgica.2022; 165(1): 135. CrossRef
|