Interspinous implants: are the new implants better than the last generation? A review - Wikidata - wikimedia - TriplyDB

Interspinous implants: are the new implants better than the last generation? A review

Interspinous implants: are the new implants better than the last generation? A review

http://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q33700209

about

Utilization of Interspinous Devices Throughout the United States Over a Recent Decade: An Analysis of the Nationwide Inpatient Sample.

P2860

Q55427551-36FC34C2-9BE9-40F5-8EBC-59042BA82B64

P2860

Interspinous implants: are the new implants better than the last generation? A review

http://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q33700209

description

2017 nî lūn-bûn

@nan

2017 թուականի Մարտին հրատարակուած գիտական յօդուած

@hyw

2017 թվականի մարտին հրատարակված գիտական հոդված

@hy

2017年の論文

@ja

2017年論文

@yue

2017年論文

@zh-hant

2017年論文

@zh-hk

2017年論文

@zh-mo

2017年論文

@zh-tw

2017年论文

@wuu

name

Interspinous implants: are the new implants better than the last generation? A review

@ast

Interspinous implants: are the new implants better than the last generation? A review

@en

type

label

Interspinous implants: are the new implants better than the last generation? A review

@ast

Interspinous implants: are the new implants better than the last generation? A review

@en

prefLabel

Interspinous implants: are the new implants better than the last generation? A review

@ast

Interspinous implants: are the new implants better than the last generation? A review

@en

P1433

Q33700209-832ADF30-1718-406B-92BC-C6D12B0A3EB7

P1476

Q33700209-F55D996D-58CA-4F53-9D52-6930D645599C

P2093

Q33700209-3164A58A-981C-4FEA-A27A-107901A25519

Q33700209-5205AE9E-9808-41DB-9D83-CDF1100DC41E

Q33700209-5EE95592-90B5-4B3D-B48F-B941F6E0FE45

Q33700209-B2A1F203-4A0F-4AE2-B5A3-E915E20DE353

Q33700209-F386FDD8-2F1E-44C0-9225-68FBAF81FC44

P2860

Q33700209-0726A5BC-EC01-4B0B-8693-375A810CDDDF

Q33700209-1068003B-4329-4797-A0A8-B6D2A98C436E

Q33700209-16E9480B-195D-4CF1-8CE2-5549E0C88891

Q33700209-197D9E53-45B8-4377-974B-CF34B45785A6

Q33700209-233C0DA1-C6B8-44B2-8165-32CAFEACF643

Q33700209-24F29213-B589-4B3F-B259-296BA71AA34C

Q33700209-280F6267-6BBA-4394-AB85-E3855D587669

Q33700209-28B2C626-E99E-450C-A045-AC97D418B75B

Q33700209-2BFB83A9-E15F-4028-BCEB-CCC4AD499019

Q33700209-2C287B72-4125-444D-A928-96E20CF52AD7

P2888

Q33700209-84000965-3888-4C3D-941B-9B895D9023C8

P304

Q33700209-CE0A37EE-B71E-4D4E-AE14-D90AB365DDB3

P31

Q33700209-5FF834E5-CC6D-488C-91E0-EB52AFCA0852

P356

Q33700209-9E4C1671-4927-4208-A6BA-601102FD5FA6

P433

Q33700209-DC584FED-0CC5-4B13-A8A7-87770C502D55

P478

Q33700209-7C7E0632-ADDA-46E7-966B-FBCC4AE6169F

P577

Q33700209-76887081-7069-4238-94BF-CD6C4E6B0DD4

P6179

Q33700209-0310A4BD-9C46-4E96-8B1C-745A92700F68

P698

Q33700209-EB921F82-5711-45B3-87BA-EA5187DA56E7

P932

Q33700209-EABAC910-8C3D-4763-81C5-E32FDCA154A5

P356

S12178-017-9401-Z

P1433

Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine

P1476

Interspinous implants: are the new implants better than the last generation? A review

@en

P2093

Alexander Duffy

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string

George Rymarczuk

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string

Joshua Heller

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string

Michael Pintauro

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string

Payman Vahedi

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string

P2860

Surgery for degenerative lumbar spondylosis

Interspinous spacer versus traditional decompressive surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

One-year follow-up of a series of 100 patients treated for lumbar spinal canal stenosis by means of HeliFix interspinous process decompression device.

Interspinous spacers in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spinal disease: our experience with DIAM and Aperius devices

Percutaneous interspinous distraction device for the treatment of lumbar spinal canal stenosis: clinical and radiographic results at 2-year follow-up.

Long-term reduction in pain and disability after surgery with the interspinous device for intervertebral assisted motion (DIAM) spinal stabilization system in patients with low back pain: 4-year follow-up from a longitudinal prospective case series.

Minimally invasive treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis with a novel interspinous spacer

Bone resorption during the first year after implantation of a single-segment dynamic interspinous stabilization device and its risk factors.

A review of interspinous fusion devices: High complication, reoperation rates, and costs with poor outcomes.

Interspinous spacer implant in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: preliminary results of a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial

P2888

s12178-017-9401-z

P304

189-198

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string

P31

scholarly article

P356

10.1007/S12178-017-9401-Z

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string

P433

2

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string

P478

10

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string

P577

2017-03-22T00:00:00Z

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime

P6179

1084034323

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string

P698

28332140

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string

P932

5435632

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string