Downloads & Free Reading Options - Results

14

14

14

14

Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh

Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh

3 volumes, color plates ; (4to)

3 volumes, color plates ; (4to)

3 volumes, color plates ; (4to)

3 volumes, color plates ; (4to)

3 volumes, color plates ; (4to)

3 volumes, color plates ; (4to)

Book digitized by Google and uploaded to the Internet Archive by user tpb.

Book digitized by Google and uploaded to the Internet Archive by user tpb.

ESTC

xliv, 1364 p., 9 leaves of plates : 24 cm

A system of surgery. 1787: Volume 5 . Digitized from IA40313509-17 . Previous issue: bim_eighteenth-century_a-system-of-surgery_bell-benjamin-frcb_1785_3 .

[Chirurgie English]. A general system of surgery. In three parts. Containing the doctrine and ,amage, emt/ 0/ Pf wounds, fractures, ... II. Of the several operations ... III. Of the several bandages ... The whole illustrated ... 1753: Volume 1 . Digitized from IA40312803-60 . Next issue: bim_eighteenth-century_chirurgie-english-a-g_heister-lorenz_1753_2 .

[Chirurgie English]. A general system of surgery. In three parts. Containing the doctrine and ,amage, emt/ 0/ Pf wounds, fractures, ... II. Of the several operations ... III. Of the several bandages ... The whole illustrated ... 1753: Volume 1 . Digitized from IA40312803-60 . Next issue: bim_eighteenth-century_chirurgie-english-a-g_heister-lorenz_1753_2 .

[Chirurgie English]. A general system of surgery. In three parts. Containing the doctrine and ,amage, emt/ 0/ Pf wounds, fractures, ... II. Of the several operations ... III. Of the several bandages ... The whole illustrated ... 1753: Volume 1 . Digitized from IA40312803-60 . Next issue: bim_eighteenth-century_chirurgie-english-a-g_heister-lorenz_1753_2 .

Book digitized by Google and uploaded to the Internet Archive by user tpb.

[Chirurgie. English]. A general system of surgery. In three parts ... The whole illustrated with thirty-eight copper plates, ... Translated into English from the Latin of Dr. Laurence Heister. 1748: Volume 1 . Digitized from IA40313615-20 . Next issue: bim_eighteenth-century_chirurgie-english-a-_heister-lorenz_1748_2 .

This paper is in the public domain in USA. Metadata comes from the CrossRef API, see full record in the source URL below.

This paper is in the public domain in USA. Metadata comes from the CrossRef API, see full record in the source URL below.

A system of surgery. By Benjamin Bell, ... Illustrated with copper plates. ... - A new edition. 1790: Volume 2 . Digitized from IA40310418-35 . Previous issue: bim_eighteenth-century_a-system-of-surgery-by-_bell-benjamin_1790_1 . Next issue: bim_eighteenth-century_a-system-of-surgery-by-_bell-benjamin_1790_3 .

A system of surgery. By Benjamin Bell, ... Illustrated with copper plates. ... - A new edition. 1790: Volume 2 . Digitized from IA40310418-35 . Previous issue: bim_eighteenth-century_a-system-of-surgery-by-_bell-benjamin_1790_1 . Next issue: bim_eighteenth-century_a-system-of-surgery-by-_bell-benjamin_1790_3 .

A system of surgery. By Benjamin Bell, ... Illustrated with copper plates. ... - A new edition. 1790: Volume 2 . Digitized from IA40310418-35 . Previous issue: bim_eighteenth-century_a-system-of-surgery-by-_bell-benjamin_1790_1 . Next issue: bim_eighteenth-century_a-system-of-surgery-by-_bell-benjamin_1790_3 .

A system of surgery. By Benjamin Bell, ... Illustrated with copper plates. ... - A new edition. 1790: Volume 2 . Digitized from IA40310418-35 . Previous issue: bim_eighteenth-century_a-system-of-surgery-by-_bell-benjamin_1790_1 . Next issue: bim_eighteenth-century_a-system-of-surgery-by-_bell-benjamin_1790_3 .

This dissertation describes the experimental analysis and design of a second generation robotic laser system used for ophthalmic surgery. The goal of this research project is to develop an automated laser delivery and retinal observation system that is capable of placing multiple lesions of predetermined sizes into known locations in the retina. The goal of this dissertation is to show that from an economic, scientific, and engineering standpoint, the proposed design for this new system is feasible. The first generation laser system is the slitlamp microscope with a laser delivery system, where the laser is controlled by the manual dexterity of the ophthalmologist. This new system is designed to augment the ophthalmologist, making the operator more efficient with less training. The system is intended to simplify the surgical process while improving accuracy, speed, and safety. This task can be divided into three areas. The first is to completely develop an automated retina observation system, which will allow the computer to observe all areas of the retina automatically. The second part of the task is to design a computer controlled pointing and tracking system for the laser, which will keep the laser positioned onto one spot on retina during small movements of the eye. The third portion is to design and a test a reflectance measuring system that monitors and controls the size of the lesion. All three parts must be integrated into one cohesive, economical system. Thesis.

This dissertation describes the experimental analysis and design of a second generation robotic laser system used for ophthalmic surgery. The goal of this research project is to develop an automated laser delivery and retinal observation system that is capable of placing multiple lesions of predetermined sizes into known locations in the retina. The goal of this dissertation is to show that from an economic, scientific, and engineering standpoint, the proposed design for this new system is feasible. The first generation laser system is the slitlamp microscope with a laser delivery system, where the laser is controlled by the manual dexterity of the ophthalmologist. This new system is designed to augment the ophthalmologist, making the operator more efficient with less training. The system is intended to simplify the surgical process while improving accuracy, speed, and safety. This task can be divided into three areas. The first is to completely develop an automated retina observation system, which will allow the computer to observe all areas of the retina automatically. The second part of the task is to design a computer controlled pointing and tracking system for the laser, which will keep the laser positioned onto one spot on retina during small movements of the eye. The third portion is to design and a test a reflectance measuring system that monitors and controls the size of the lesion. All three parts must be integrated into one cohesive, economical system. Thesis.

This dissertation describes the experimental analysis and design of a second generation robotic laser system used for ophthalmic surgery. The goal of this research project is to develop an automated laser delivery and retinal observation system that is capable of placing multiple lesions of predetermined sizes into known locations in the retina. The goal of this dissertation is to show that from an economic, scientific, and engineering standpoint, the proposed design for this new system is feasible. The first generation laser system is the slitlamp microscope with a laser delivery system, where the laser is controlled by the manual dexterity of the ophthalmologist. This new system is designed to augment the ophthalmologist, making the operator more efficient with less training. The system is intended to simplify the surgical process while improving accuracy, speed, and safety. This task can be divided into three areas. The first is to completely develop an automated retina observation system, which will allow the computer to observe all areas of the retina automatically. The second part of the task is to design a computer controlled pointing and tracking system for the laser, which will keep the laser positioned onto one spot on retina during small movements of the eye. The third portion is to design and a test a reflectance measuring system that monitors and controls the size of the lesion. All three parts must be integrated into one cohesive, economical system. Thesis.

Book digitized by Google and uploaded to the Internet Archive by user tpb.

Microfilmed for preservation

A system of surgery. By Benjamin Bell, ... Illustrated with copper plates. ... - A new edition. 1790: Volume 5 . Digitized from IA40310418-35 . Previous issue: bim_eighteenth-century_a-system-of-surgery-by-_bell-benjamin_1790_4 . Next issue: bim_eighteenth-century_a-system-of-surgery-by-_bell-benjamin_1790_6 .

A system of surgery. 1788: Volume 6 . Digitized from IA40313509-18 . Next issue: bim_eighteenth-century_a-treatise-on-the-medica_falck-nd_1776 .

A system of surgery. By Benjamin Bell, ... Illustrated with copper plates. ... - The third edition corrected. 1787: Volume 2 . Digitized from IA40313514-07 . Previous issue: bim_eighteenth-century_a-system-of-surgery-by-_bell-benjamin_1787_1 . Next issue: bim_eighteenth-century_a-system-of-surgery-by-_bell-benjamin_1788_3 .

A system of surgery. By Benjamin Bell, ... Illustrated with copper plates. ... - The third edition corrected. 1787: Volume 2 . Digitized from IA40313514-07 . Previous issue: bim_eighteenth-century_a-system-of-surgery-by-_bell-benjamin_1787_1 . Next issue: bim_eighteenth-century_a-system-of-surgery-by-_bell-benjamin_1788_3 .

ESTC

ESTC

ESTC

Book digitized by Google and uploaded to the Internet Archive by user tpb.

6 volumes : (8vo)

6 volumes : (8vo)

[Navy-surgeon: or, a practical system of surgery]. The navy surgeon; or, practical system of surgery. With a dissertation on hot and cold mineral springs; and physical observations of the coast of Guinea. ... 1742.. Digitized from IA40312803-31 . Next issue: bim_eighteenth-century_experiencd-measures-how_strother-edward_1721 .

This article is from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders , volume 12 . Abstract Background: Fusion of lumbar spine segments is a well-established therapy for many pathologies. The procedure changes the biomechanics of the spine. Initial clinical benefits may be outweighed by ensuing damage to the adjacent segments. Various surgical devices and techniques have been developed to prevent this deterioration. "Topping off" systems combine rigid fusion with a flexible pedicle screw system to prevent adjacent segment disease (ASD). To date, there is no convincing evidence that these devices provide any patient benefits. Methods/Design: The study is designed as a randomized, therapy-controlled trial in a clinical care setting at a university hospital. Patients presenting to the outpatient clinic with degenerative disc disease or spondylolisthesis will be assessed against study inclusion and exclusion criteria. After randomization, the control group will undergo conventional fusion. The intervention group will undergo fusion with a supplemental flexible pedicle screw system to protect the adjacent segment ("topping off").Follow-up examination will take place immediately after treatment during hospital stay, after 6 weeks, and then after 6, 12, 24 and 36 months. Subsequently, ongoing assessments will be performed annually.Outcome measurements will include quality of life and pain assessments using questionnaires (SF-36™, ODI, COMI). In addition, clinical and radiologic ASD, work-related disability, and duration of work disability will be assessed. Inpatient and 6-month mortality, surgery-related data (e.g., intraoperative complications, blood loss, length of incision, surgical duration), postoperative complications, adverse events, and serious adverse events will be documented and monitored throughout the study. Cost-effectiveness analysis will also be provided. Discussion: New hybrid systems might improve the outcome of lumbar spine fusion. To date, there is no convincing published data on effectiveness or safety of these topping off systems. High quality data is required to evaluate the benefits and drawbacks of topping off devices. If only because these devices are quite expensive compared to conventional fusion implants, nonessential use should be avoided. In fact, these high costs necessitate efforts by health care providers to evaluate the effects of these implants. Randomized clinical trials are highly recommended to evaluate the benefits or harm to the patient. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01224379

This article is from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders , volume 12 . Abstract Background: Fusion of lumbar spine segments is a well-established therapy for many pathologies. The procedure changes the biomechanics of the spine. Initial clinical benefits may be outweighed by ensuing damage to the adjacent segments. Various surgical devices and techniques have been developed to prevent this deterioration. "Topping off" systems combine rigid fusion with a flexible pedicle screw system to prevent adjacent segment disease (ASD). To date, there is no convincing evidence that these devices provide any patient benefits. Methods/Design: The study is designed as a randomized, therapy-controlled trial in a clinical care setting at a university hospital. Patients presenting to the outpatient clinic with degenerative disc disease or spondylolisthesis will be assessed against study inclusion and exclusion criteria. After randomization, the control group will undergo conventional fusion. The intervention group will undergo fusion with a supplemental flexible pedicle screw system to protect the adjacent segment ("topping off").Follow-up examination will take place immediately after treatment during hospital stay, after 6 weeks, and then after 6, 12, 24 and 36 months. Subsequently, ongoing assessments will be performed annually.Outcome measurements will include quality of life and pain assessments using questionnaires (SF-36™, ODI, COMI). In addition, clinical and radiologic ASD, work-related disability, and duration of work disability will be assessed. Inpatient and 6-month mortality, surgery-related data (e.g., intraoperative complications, blood loss, length of incision, surgical duration), postoperative complications, adverse events, and serious adverse events will be documented and monitored throughout the study. Cost-effectiveness analysis will also be provided. Discussion: New hybrid systems might improve the outcome of lumbar spine fusion. To date, there is no convincing published data on effectiveness or safety of these topping off systems. High quality data is required to evaluate the benefits and drawbacks of topping off devices. If only because these devices are quite expensive compared to conventional fusion implants, nonessential use should be avoided. In fact, these high costs necessitate efforts by health care providers to evaluate the effects of these implants. Randomized clinical trials are highly recommended to evaluate the benefits or harm to the patient. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01224379

This article is from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders , volume 12 . Abstract Background: Fusion of lumbar spine segments is a well-established therapy for many pathologies. The procedure changes the biomechanics of the spine. Initial clinical benefits may be outweighed by ensuing damage to the adjacent segments. Various surgical devices and techniques have been developed to prevent this deterioration. "Topping off" systems combine rigid fusion with a flexible pedicle screw system to prevent adjacent segment disease (ASD). To date, there is no convincing evidence that these devices provide any patient benefits. Methods/Design: The study is designed as a randomized, therapy-controlled trial in a clinical care setting at a university hospital. Patients presenting to the outpatient clinic with degenerative disc disease or spondylolisthesis will be assessed against study inclusion and exclusion criteria. After randomization, the control group will undergo conventional fusion. The intervention group will undergo fusion with a supplemental flexible pedicle screw system to protect the adjacent segment ("topping off").Follow-up examination will take place immediately after treatment during hospital stay, after 6 weeks, and then after 6, 12, 24 and 36 months. Subsequently, ongoing assessments will be performed annually.Outcome measurements will include quality of life and pain assessments using questionnaires (SF-36™, ODI, COMI). In addition, clinical and radiologic ASD, work-related disability, and duration of work disability will be assessed. Inpatient and 6-month mortality, surgery-related data (e.g., intraoperative complications, blood loss, length of incision, surgical duration), postoperative complications, adverse events, and serious adverse events will be documented and monitored throughout the study. Cost-effectiveness analysis will also be provided. Discussion: New hybrid systems might improve the outcome of lumbar spine fusion. To date, there is no convincing published data on effectiveness or safety of these topping off systems. High quality data is required to evaluate the benefits and drawbacks of topping off devices. If only because these devices are quite expensive compared to conventional fusion implants, nonessential use should be avoided. In fact, these high costs necessitate efforts by health care providers to evaluate the effects of these implants. Randomized clinical trials are highly recommended to evaluate the benefits or harm to the patient. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01224379

This article is from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders , volume 12 . Abstract Background: Fusion of lumbar spine segments is a well-established therapy for many pathologies. The procedure changes the biomechanics of the spine. Initial clinical benefits may be outweighed by ensuing damage to the adjacent segments. Various surgical devices and techniques have been developed to prevent this deterioration. "Topping off" systems combine rigid fusion with a flexible pedicle screw system to prevent adjacent segment disease (ASD). To date, there is no convincing evidence that these devices provide any patient benefits. Methods/Design: The study is designed as a randomized, therapy-controlled trial in a clinical care setting at a university hospital. Patients presenting to the outpatient clinic with degenerative disc disease or spondylolisthesis will be assessed against study inclusion and exclusion criteria. After randomization, the control group will undergo conventional fusion. The intervention group will undergo fusion with a supplemental flexible pedicle screw system to protect the adjacent segment ("topping off").Follow-up examination will take place immediately after treatment during hospital stay, after 6 weeks, and then after 6, 12, 24 and 36 months. Subsequently, ongoing assessments will be performed annually.Outcome measurements will include quality of life and pain assessments using questionnaires (SF-36™, ODI, COMI). In addition, clinical and radiologic ASD, work-related disability, and duration of work disability will be assessed. Inpatient and 6-month mortality, surgery-related data (e.g., intraoperative complications, blood loss, length of incision, surgical duration), postoperative complications, adverse events, and serious adverse events will be documented and monitored throughout the study. Cost-effectiveness analysis will also be provided. Discussion: New hybrid systems might improve the outcome of lumbar spine fusion. To date, there is no convincing published data on effectiveness or safety of these topping off systems. High quality data is required to evaluate the benefits and drawbacks of topping off devices. If only because these devices are quite expensive compared to conventional fusion implants, nonessential use should be avoided. In fact, these high costs necessitate efforts by health care providers to evaluate the effects of these implants. Randomized clinical trials are highly recommended to evaluate the benefits or harm to the patient. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01224379

This article is from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders , volume 12 . Abstract Background: Fusion of lumbar spine segments is a well-established therapy for many pathologies. The procedure changes the biomechanics of the spine. Initial clinical benefits may be outweighed by ensuing damage to the adjacent segments. Various surgical devices and techniques have been developed to prevent this deterioration. "Topping off" systems combine rigid fusion with a flexible pedicle screw system to prevent adjacent segment disease (ASD). To date, there is no convincing evidence that these devices provide any patient benefits. Methods/Design: The study is designed as a randomized, therapy-controlled trial in a clinical care setting at a university hospital. Patients presenting to the outpatient clinic with degenerative disc disease or spondylolisthesis will be assessed against study inclusion and exclusion criteria. After randomization, the control group will undergo conventional fusion. The intervention group will undergo fusion with a supplemental flexible pedicle screw system to protect the adjacent segment ("topping off").Follow-up examination will take place immediately after treatment during hospital stay, after 6 weeks, and then after 6, 12, 24 and 36 months. Subsequently, ongoing assessments will be performed annually.Outcome measurements will include quality of life and pain assessments using questionnaires (SF-36™, ODI, COMI). In addition, clinical and radiologic ASD, work-related disability, and duration of work disability will be assessed. Inpatient and 6-month mortality, surgery-related data (e.g., intraoperative complications, blood loss, length of incision, surgical duration), postoperative complications, adverse events, and serious adverse events will be documented and monitored throughout the study. Cost-effectiveness analysis will also be provided. Discussion: New hybrid systems might improve the outcome of lumbar spine fusion. To date, there is no convincing published data on effectiveness or safety of these topping off systems. High quality data is required to evaluate the benefits and drawbacks of topping off devices. If only because these devices are quite expensive compared to conventional fusion implants, nonessential use should be avoided. In fact, these high costs necessitate efforts by health care providers to evaluate the effects of these implants. Randomized clinical trials are highly recommended to evaluate the benefits or harm to the patient. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01224379

This article is from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders , volume 12 . Abstract Background: Fusion of lumbar spine segments is a well-established therapy for many pathologies. The procedure changes the biomechanics of the spine. Initial clinical benefits may be outweighed by ensuing damage to the adjacent segments. Various surgical devices and techniques have been developed to prevent this deterioration. "Topping off" systems combine rigid fusion with a flexible pedicle screw system to prevent adjacent segment disease (ASD). To date, there is no convincing evidence that these devices provide any patient benefits. Methods/Design: The study is designed as a randomized, therapy-controlled trial in a clinical care setting at a university hospital. Patients presenting to the outpatient clinic with degenerative disc disease or spondylolisthesis will be assessed against study inclusion and exclusion criteria. After randomization, the control group will undergo conventional fusion. The intervention group will undergo fusion with a supplemental flexible pedicle screw system to protect the adjacent segment ("topping off").Follow-up examination will take place immediately after treatment during hospital stay, after 6 weeks, and then after 6, 12, 24 and 36 months. Subsequently, ongoing assessments will be performed annually.Outcome measurements will include quality of life and pain assessments using questionnaires (SF-36™, ODI, COMI). In addition, clinical and radiologic ASD, work-related disability, and duration of work disability will be assessed. Inpatient and 6-month mortality, surgery-related data (e.g., intraoperative complications, blood loss, length of incision, surgical duration), postoperative complications, adverse events, and serious adverse events will be documented and monitored throughout the study. Cost-effectiveness analysis will also be provided. Discussion: New hybrid systems might improve the outcome of lumbar spine fusion. To date, there is no convincing published data on effectiveness or safety of these topping off systems. High quality data is required to evaluate the benefits and drawbacks of topping off devices. If only because these devices are quite expensive compared to conventional fusion implants, nonessential use should be avoided. In fact, these high costs necessitate efforts by health care providers to evaluate the effects of these implants. Randomized clinical trials are highly recommended to evaluate the benefits or harm to the patient. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01224379