Header Logo

Connection

Kern Singh to Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures

Back to Details
This is a "connection" page, showing publications Kern Singh has written about Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures.
Kern Singh
Connection Strength
22.590
Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures
  1. Postoperative clinical outcomes in patients undergoing MIS-TLIF versus LLIF for adjacent segment disease. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2023 07; 165(7):1907-1914.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.656
  2. Single-Level Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion versus Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Posterior Instrumentation at L5/S1. World Neurosurg. 2022 01; 157:e111-e122.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.584
  3. The Effect of the Severity of Preoperative Back Pain on Patient-Reported Outcomes, Recovery Ratios, and Patient Satisfaction Following Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (MIS-TLIF). World Neurosurg. 2021 12; 156:e254-e265.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.584
  4. Validation of VR-12 Physical Function in Minimally Invasive Lumbar Discectomy. World Neurosurg. 2021 11; 155:e362-e368.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.580
  5. Validity of Patient Health Questionnaire-9 in Minimally Invasive Lumbar Interbody Fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2020 Jun 01; 45(11):E663-E669.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.533
  6. Complications Following Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Incidence, Independent Risk Factors, and Clinical Impact. Clin Spine Surg. 2020 06; 33(5):E236-E240.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.533
  7. The Influence of Preoperative Mental Health on PROMIS Physical Function Outcomes Following Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2020 Feb 15; 45(4):E236-E243.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.522
  8. Postoperative Outcomes Based on American Society of Anesthesiologists Score After Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion. Clin Spine Surg. 2020 02; 33(1):E40-E42.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.521
  9. PHQ-9 Score Predicts Postoperative Outcomes Following Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion. Clin Spine Surg. 2019 12; 32(10):444-448.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.514
  10. Sex Differences on Postoperative Pain and Disability Following Minimally Invasive Lumbar Discectomy. Clin Spine Surg. 2019 12; 32(10):E444-E448.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.514
  11. The Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Physical Function to Predict Outcomes Based on Body Mass Index Following Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2019 Dec 01; 44(23):E1388-E1395.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.514
  12. Patient Perceptions of Iliac Crest Bone Grafting in Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion. Clin Spine Surg. 2019 12; 32(10):430-434.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.514
  13. Device solutions for a challenging spine surgery: minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF). Expert Rev Med Devices. 2019 04; 16(4):299-305.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.491
  14. PROMIS Physical Function Score Strongly Correlates With Legacy Outcome Measures in Minimally Invasive Lumbar Microdiscectomy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2019 03 15; 44(6):442-446.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.490
  15. The Impact of Comorbidity Burden on Complications, Length of Stay, and Direct Hospital Costs After Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2019 03 01; 44(5):363-368.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.488
  16. Does Gender Influence Postoperative Outcomes in Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion? Clin Spine Surg. 2019 03; 32(2):E107-E111.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.488
  17. Risk Factors for a Long Hospital Stay Following Minimally Invasive Lumbar Discectomy. Clin Spine Surg. 2019 02; 32(1):E56-E59.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.486
  18. The Effect of Preoperative Medications on Length of Stay, Inpatient Pain, and Narcotics Consumption After Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion. Clin Spine Surg. 2019 02; 32(1):E37-E42.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.486
  19. Iliac Crest Bone Graft for Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Prospective Analysis of Inpatient Pain, Narcotics Consumption, and Costs. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2018 09 15; 43(18):1307-1312.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.473
  20. Validity of PROMIS in minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a preliminary evaluation. J Neurosurg Spine. 2018 07; 29(1):28-33.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.459
  21. Patient Perceptions of Minimally Invasive Versus Open Spine Surgery. Clin Spine Surg. 2018 04; 31(3):E184-E192.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.458
  22. Is Body Mass Index a Risk Factor for Revision Procedures After Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion? Clin Spine Surg. 2018 02; 31(1):E85-E91.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.453
  23. Preoperative Mental Health is not Predictive of Patient-reported Outcomes Following a Minimally Invasive Lumbar Discectomy. Clin Spine Surg. 2017 Dec; 30(10):E1388-E1391.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.448
  24. The Utility of Routinely Obtaining Postoperative Laboratory Studies Following a Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion. Clin Spine Surg. 2017 Dec; 30(10):E1405-E1410.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.448
  25. Multimodal Analgesia Versus Intravenous Patient-Controlled Analgesia for Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Procedures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2017 Aug 01; 42(15):1145-1150.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.438
  26. Neuroforaminal Bone Growth Following Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion With BMP: A Computed Tomographic Analysis. Clin Spine Surg. 2017 Jul; 30(6):E754-E758.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.435
  27. Functional Capacity Evaluation Following Spinal Fusion Surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2016 Jul 01; 41(13):1104-1110.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.406
  28. Does Greater Body Mass Index Increase the Risk for Revision Procedures Following a Single-Level Minimally Invasive Lumbar Discectomy? Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2016 May; 41(9):816-21.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.401
  29. Minimally Invasive Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2015 Oct; 28(8):295-7.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.385
  30. Preoperative narcotic utilization: accuracy of patient self-reporting and its association with postoperative narcotic consumption. J Neurosurg Spine. 2016 Jan; 24(1):206-14.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.384
  31. Minimally invasive lumbar decompression-the surgical learning curve. Spine J. 2016 08; 16(8):909-16.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.381
  32. Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2015 Jul; 28(6):222-5.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.379
  33. BMP-2-induced Neuroforaminal Bone Growth in the Setting of a Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2015 Jun; 28(5):186-8.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.377
  34. Prospective, randomized, controlled trial of silicate-substituted calcium phosphate versus rhBMP-2 in a minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2014 Feb 01; 39(3):185-91.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.343
  35. A perioperative cost analysis comparing single-level minimally invasive and open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Spine J. 2014 Aug 01; 14(8):1694-701.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.338
  36. Clinical sequelae after rhBMP-2 use in a minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Spine J. 2013 Sep; 13(9):1118-25.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.334
  37. Predictive factors of hospital stay in patients undergoing minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and instrumentation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2012 Nov 15; 37(24):2046-54.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.316
  38. A comparison of perioperative costs and outcomes in patients with and without workers' compensation claims treated with minimally invasive or open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2012 Oct 15; 37(22):1914-9.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.314
  39. Minimally invasive thoracolumbar corpectomy and reconstruction. Orthopedics. 2012 Jan 16; 35(1):e74-9.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.298
  40. Intradiscal therapy: a review of current treatment modalities. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005 Sep 01; 30(17 Suppl):S20-6.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.192
  41. Preoperative predictors of prolonged hospitalization in patients undergoing lateral lumbar interbody fusion. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2023 09; 165(9):2615-2624.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.164
  42. Depressed patients with greater symptom duration before MIS-TLIF do not report inferior outcomes. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2023 07; 165(7):1923-1929.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.163
  43. Poor mental health scores correlate with inferior outcomes following minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2023 07; 165(7):1931-1942.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.163
  44. Influence of Prolonged Duration of Symptoms Before MIS-TLIF in a Workers' Compensation Population. World Neurosurg. 2023 Jul; 175:e439-e446.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.162
  45. Recovery ratios and minimum clinically important difference for clinical outcomes in workers' compensation recipients undergoing MIS-TLIF versus ALIF. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2023 02; 165(2):315-323.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.160
  46. Minimum Clinically Important Difference in Patients Undergoing Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion. Neurosurgery. 2023 06 01; 92(6):1199-1207.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.160
  47. Minimally Invasive Transforaminal versus Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Patients Undergoing Revision Fusion: Clinical Outcome Comparison. World Neurosurg. 2022 Nov; 167:e1208-e1218.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.156
  48. The Effect of the Severity of Preoperative Leg Pain on Patient-Reported Outcomes, Minimum Clinically Important Difference Achievement, and Patient Satisfaction After Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion. World Neurosurg. 2022 Nov; 167:e1196-e1207.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.156
  49. Impact of Ambulatory Setting for Workers' Compensation Patients Undergoing One-Level Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Review of the Literature. World Neurosurg. 2022 Nov; 167:e251-e267.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.155
  50. Comparing Patient-Reported Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Lumbar Fusion for Isthmic Spondylolisthesis with Predominant Back Pain versus Predominant Leg Pain Symptoms. World Neurosurg. 2022 Oct; 166:e672-e680.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.155
  51. Does Preoperative Symptom Duration Impact Clinical Outcomes After Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion in the Ambulatory Setting? World Neurosurg. 2022 Oct; 166:e599-e606.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.154
  52. Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Single Surgeon Learning Curve. World Neurosurg. 2022 08; 164:e411-e419.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.152
  53. Severe Comorbidity Burden Does Not Influence Postoperative Clinical Outcomes and Trajectory for Back Pain, Leg Pain, Physical Function, or Disability in Patients Undergoing Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Cohort-Matched Analysis. World Neurosurg. 2022 08; 164:e157-e168.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.152
  54. Spine Surgery Complications in the Ambulatory Surgical Center Setting: Systematic Review. Clin Spine Surg. 2022 04 01; 35(3):118-126.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.151
  55. Single-level TLIF Versus LLIF at L4-5: A Comparison of Patient-reported Outcomes and Recovery Ratios. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2022 Feb 15; 30(4):e495-e505.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.150
  56. Impact of Obesity Severity on Achieving a Minimum Clinically Important Difference Following Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion. Clin Spine Surg. 2022 02 01; 35(1):E267-E273.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.149
  57. Impact of Time to Surgery for Patients Using Workers' Compensation Insurance Undergoing Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Preliminary Analysis of Clinical Outcomes. World Neurosurg. 2022 04; 160:e421-e429.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.149
  58. The Effect of the Severity of Preoperative Disability on Patient-Reported Outcomes and Patient Satisfaction Following Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion. World Neurosurg. 2022 Mar; 159:e334-e346.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.148
  59. Influence of Preoperative 12-Item Short Form Mental Composite Score on Clinical Outcomes in an Isthmic Spondylolisthesis Population Undergoing Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion. World Neurosurg. 2022 02; 158:e1022-e1030.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.148
  60. Impact of Advanced Age on Postoperative Outcomes Following Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2021 Sep 01; 29(17):e869-e879.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.145
  61. Validation of PROMIS Physical Function in MIS TLIF: 2-Year Follow-up. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2020 Nov 15; 45(22):E1516-E1522.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.137
  62. Diabetes Does Not Increase Complications, Length of Stay, or Hospital Costs After Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion. Clin Spine Surg. 2020 08; 33(7):E307-E311.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.135
  63. Preoperative patient activation is predictive of improvements in patient-reported outcomes following minimally invasive lumbar decompression. Eur Spine J. 2020 09; 29(9):2222-2230.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.134
  64. The Effect of Preoperative Symptom Duration on Postoperative Outcomes After Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion. Clin Spine Surg. 2020 07; 33(6):E263-E268.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.134
  65. The Impact of Comorbidity Burden on Postoperative PROMIS Physical Function Following Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion. Clin Spine Surg. 2020 07; 33(6):E294-E298.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.134
  66. The identification of risk factors for increased postoperative pain following minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Eur Spine J. 2020 06; 29(6):1304-1310.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.131
  67. Safety and Efficacy of Revision Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression in the Ambulatory Setting. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2019 Apr 15; 44(8):E494-E499.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.123
  68. The Effect of Preoperative Symptom Duration on Postoperative Outcomes After a Tubular Lumbar Microdiscectomy. Clin Spine Surg. 2019 02; 32(1):E27-E30.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.121
  69. Comparison of Postoperative Outcomes Between Primary MIS TLIF and MIS TLIF With Revision Decompression. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2019 Jan 15; 44(2):150-156.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.121
  70. Impact of local steroid application in a minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: results of a prospective, randomized, single-blind trial. J Neurosurg Spine. 2018 11 09; 30(2):222-227.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.119
  71. Postoperative Narcotic Consumption in Workman's Compensation Patients Following a Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2015 Aug 15; 40(16):1284-8.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.095
  72. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: one surgeon's learning curve. Spine J. 2014 Aug 01; 14(8):1460-5.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.084
  73. Subaxial cervical and cervicothoracic fixation techniques--indications, techniques, and outcomes. Orthop Clin North Am. 2012 Jan; 43(1):19-28, vii.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.073
Connection Strength

The connection strength for concepts is the sum of the scores for each matching publication.

Publication scores are based on many factors, including how long ago they were written and whether the person is a first or senior author.