about
Recurrent lumbar disc herniation after tubular microdiscectomy: Analysis of learning curve progression.Revisions for screw malposition and clinical outcomes after robot-guided lumbar fusion for spondylolisthesis.Effectiveness of a Decision-Making Protocol for the Surgical Treatment of Lumbar Stenosis with Grade 1 Degenerative Spondylolisthesis.Identifying subsets of patients with single-level degenerative disc disease for lumbar fusion: the value of prognostic tests in surgical decision making.Minimally invasive transaxial lumbosacral interbody fusion: a ten year single-centre experience.The changing sella: internal carotid artery shift during transsphenoidal pituitary surgery.Patient-reported outcomes unbiased by length of follow-up after lumbar degenerative spine surgery: Do we need 2 years of follow-up?Anatomical features of primary brain tumors affect seizure risk and semiologyTandem Disc Herniation of the Lumbar and Cervical Spine: Case Series and Review of the Epidemiological, Pathophysiological and Genetic LiteratureCardiac Arrest During Spine Surgery in the Prone Position: Case Report and Review of the LiteratureAre patient-reported outcome measures biased by method of follow-up? Evaluating paper-based and digital follow-up after lumbar fusion surgeryPedicle Screw Revision in Robot-Guided, Navigated, and Freehand Thoracolumbar Instrumentation: A Systematic Review and Meta-AnalysisRecurrent Laryngeal Nerve Palsy Is More Frequent After Secondary than After Primary Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: Insights from a Registry of 525 PatientsThe five-repetition sit-to-stand test: evaluation of a simple and objective tool for the assessment of degenerative pathologies of the lumbar spineInitial classification of low back and leg pain based on objective functional testing: a pilot study of machine learning applied to diagnosticsThe European Robotic Spinal Instrumentation (EUROSPIN) study: protocol for a multicentre prospective observational study of pedicle screw revision surgery after robot-guided, navigated and freehand thoracolumbar spinal fusionReliability of the 6-minute walking test smartphone applicationSafety and Efficacy of Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Discogenic Chronic Low Back Pain in a Short-stay Setting: Data From a Prospective RegistryExternal validation of a prediction model for pain and functional outcome after elective lumbar spinal fusionAssociation of time to surgery with leg pain after lumbar discectomy: is delayed surgery detrimental?Letter to the Editor. Class imbalance in machine learning for neurosurgical outcome prediction: are our models valid?Gender differences in degenerative spine surgery: Do female patients really fare worse?Can objective functional impairment in lumbar degenerative disease be reliably assessed at home using the five-repetition sit-to-stand test? A prospective studyIntraoperative unfolding and postoperative pruning of the pituitary gland after transsphenoidal surgery for pituitary adenoma: A volumetric and endocrinological evaluationMachine learning-based preoperative predictive analytics for lumbar spinal stenosisPredicting extent of resection in transsphenoidal surgery for pituitary adenomaObjective measures of functional impairment for degenerative diseases of the lumbar spine: a systematic review of the literaturePredictors of loss of follow-up in a prospective registry: which patients drop out 12 months after lumbar spine surgery?Machine Learning Algorithm Identifies Patients at High Risk for Early Complications After Intracranial Tumor Surgery: Registry-Based Cohort StudyThe Zurich Pituitary Score predicts utility of intraoperative high-field magnetic resonance imaging in transsphenoidal pituitary adenoma surgeryAuthors' Response to Letter to Editor: Patient-reported outcomes unbiased by length of follow-up after lumbar degenerative spine surgery: do we need 2 years of follow-up?Conflicts of interest in randomized controlled trials reported in neurosurgical journalsImproving recovery after elective degenerative spine surgery: 5-year experience with an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocolAssociation of maximum back and leg pain severity with objective functional impairment as assessed by five-repetition sit-to-stand testing: analysis of two prospective studiesResponse to "Going beyond scoring systems for cavernous sinus involvement in trans-sphenoidal pituitary surgery"A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Perioperative Parameters in Robot-Guided, Navigated, and Freehand Thoracolumbar Pedicle Screw InstrumentationNeural network-based identification of patients at high risk for intraoperative cerebrospinal fluid leaks in endoscopic pituitary surgeryHistorical controversies about the thalamus: from etymology to functionDeep learning-based preoperative predictive analytics for patient-reported outcomes following lumbar discectomy: feasibility of center-specific modelingUtility of deep neural networks in predicting gross-total resection after transsphenoidal surgery for pituitary adenoma: a pilot study
P50
Q38648215-9C3E85E8-37E2-471B-B43B-7935E69A25D7Q38809104-DCA400A9-6330-48F9-8EA2-A0E575B90BD2Q47605435-2D69DE41-A507-4459-B6D6-5F19F1C09660Q47645074-475E6B3E-4376-49DA-A382-0A5592AD5F0FQ48017650-BFA96249-E319-406E-A980-98233733C29EQ50498888-15002BB9-7ED8-4FFD-B42C-0CC3F19EE35EQ57185548-5501B41C-54EF-43E8-BB75-E9C57906993DQ61809517-CA2D5BCF-EB6B-460E-AC7E-A845D0DB4668Q64229966-F78A4AAD-7F7A-4CD4-922D-B39B196BF6ABQ88500816-29352DC1-E157-4E27-8C43-2233D94A0DA5Q88579898-A9B011BF-CF89-4F3A-93D7-1D887CFE4129Q88957884-07D9A6B5-61B0-41F2-AA26-D3E433BCB6F0Q88976942-F5397D37-98CC-4AEB-AE1E-9F3B36FE1F28Q89343830-166FD5CA-332F-4AB6-AF65-D9FD4D5CF4FCQ89770894-6EEDDFD4-7367-4BDA-9E37-2CE9C37740E8Q90000640-869F7F5C-92FE-4969-9E12-683378B38A5AQ90097797-4A2584FE-DC4E-434D-92A1-898F39195C34Q90620541-7EE64D77-76E2-4343-80BF-D7BD1315589FQ90892914-303D43AF-C19A-48BF-8A96-0EBBC72B60E7Q90950018-93CEAF07-A965-4E55-ADD2-9A5A79873C7FQ90998785-F306BE61-9E5B-4F64-9201-E98F9D64B447Q91072496-6026A711-92E1-4A91-AF8C-76D5C8F22AAAQ91215032-4A31F558-4C91-4AD3-A7EB-43C0EFBFAAFFQ91642977-88F9FC29-6472-4580-9273-714F2C29BBB2Q91667992-2AB1EC1A-ED33-49D9-9E58-EE7CDB1F8BABQ91862901-00AF44B6-FF86-4434-A8C4-398315EAC18CQ92112655-D0695BB2-2445-417B-B5CB-FCECEDD4D222Q92272703-49AD0A8A-F96E-4AD8-9C76-0F4539906C45Q92435525-00F0CF08-7561-4053-ABCB-44FDD71E1C1BQ92490242-B8E9B0D8-1808-4A89-B8DB-2FD3D2B0183CQ92600719-6C59A9D2-1F87-4A1C-8E8E-7E3080459A3CQ92664135-61A8C4CE-D289-426B-8B39-4262B55682CEQ92750338-A858A3AE-657B-42CC-92A7-7B6340118AF6Q92884479-9237B173-4053-4C48-B724-7EF364703C2EQ92887654-BD35CD0C-A219-490B-BC93-F8DB730B50D8Q92896947-19A3E72D-4627-4445-9136-69AC0464FFC5Q92940350-CA123278-634A-4DD0-8B7E-641C4294B1C8Q93038689-3E64442E-5B7B-4331-AC4E-D491D8F3383DQ93213528-15E30382-8FD3-4898-B0B5-D9F25CD88E8FQ93215171-045FE5BF-5C4A-427F-845C-68822F5451ED
P50
description
researcher ORCID ID = 0000-0003-1039-2098
@en
wetenschapper
@nl
name
Victor E Staartjes
@ast
Victor E Staartjes
@en
Victor E Staartjes
@nl
type
label
Victor E Staartjes
@ast
Victor E Staartjes
@en
Victor E Staartjes
@nl
prefLabel
Victor E Staartjes
@ast
Victor E Staartjes
@en
Victor E Staartjes
@nl
P31
P496
0000-0003-1039-2098