Patent Grant
7641691
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
1. Field of the Invention
The present invention pertains generally to repairing intervertebral disc disorders, and more particularly to an implant and surgical procedure for repairing a degenerated intervertebral disc.
2. Description of the Background Art
An estimated 4.1 million Americans annually report intervertebral disc disorders, with a significant portion of them adding to the nearly 5.2 million low-back disabled. Though the origin of low-back pain is varied, the intervertebral disc is thought to be a primary source in many cases, and is an initiating factor in others where a degenerated disc has led to altered spinal mechanics and non-physiologic stress in surrounding tissues.
The intervertebral disc is a complex structure consisting of three distinct parts: the nucleus pulposus; the annulus fibrosus; and the cartilaginous end-plates. The nucleus pulposus is a viscous, mucoprotein gel that is approximately centrally located within the disc. It consists of abundant sulfated glycosaxninoglycans in a loose network of type II collagen, with a water content that is highest at birth (approximately 80%) and decreases with age. The annulus fibrosus is that portion of the disc which becomes differentiated from the periphery of the nucleus and forms the outer boundary of the disc. The transition between the nucleus and the annulus is progressively more indefinite with age. The annulus is made up of coarse type I collagen fibers oriented obliquely and arranged in lamellae which attach the adjacent vertebral bodies. The fibers run the same direction within a given lamella but opposite to those in adjacent lamellae. The collagen content of the disc steadily increases from the center of the nucleus to the outer layers of the annulus, where collagen reaches 70% or more of the dry weight. Type I and II collagen are distributed radially in opposing concentration gradients. The cartilaginous end-plates cover the end surfaces of the vertebral bodies and serve as the cranial and caudal surfaces of the intervertebral disc. They are composed predominately of hyaline cartilage.
The disc derives its structural properties largely through its ability to attract and retain water. The proteoglycans of the nucleus attract water osmotically, exerting a swelling pressure that enables the disc to support spinal compressive loads. The pressurized nucleus also creates tensile pre-stress within the annulus and ligamentous structures surrounding the disc. In other words, although the disc principally supports compressive loads, the fibers of the annulus experience significant tension. As a result, the annular architecture is consistent with current remodeling theories, where the ±60° orientation of the collagen fibers, relative to the longitudinal axis of the spine, is optimally arranged to support the tensile stresses developed within a pressurized cylinder. This tissue pre-stress contributes significantly to the normal kinematics and mechanical response of the spine.
When the physical stress placed on the spine exceeds the nuclear swelling pressure, water is expressed from the disc, principally through the semipermeable cartilaginous end-plates. Consequently, significant disc water loss can occur over the course of a day due to activities of daily living. For example, the average diurnal variation in human stature is about 19 mm, which is mostly attributable to changes in disc height. This change in stature corresponds to a change of about 1.5 mm in the height of each lumbar disc. Using cadaveric spines, researchers have demonstrated that under sustained loading, intervertebral discs lose height, bulge more, and become stiffer in compression and more flexible in bending. Loss of nuclear water also dramatically affects the load distribution internal to the disc. In a healthy disc under compressive loading, compressive stress is created mainly within the nucleus pulposus, with the annulus acting primarily in tension. Studies show that, after three hours of compressive loading, there is a significant change in the pressure distribution, with the highest compressive stress occurring in the posterior annulus. Similar pressure distributions have been noted in degenerated and denucleated discs as well. This reversal in the state of annular stress, from physiologic tension due to circumferential hoop stress, to non-physiologic axial compression, is also noted in other experimental, analytic and anatomic studies, and clearly demonstrates that nuclear dehydration significantly alters stress distributions within the disc as well as its biomechanical response to loading.
The most consistent chemical change observed with degeneration is loss of proteoglycan and concomitant loss of water. This dehydration of the disc leads to loss of disc height. In addition, in humans there is an increase in the ratio of keratan sulphate to chondroitin sulphate, an increase in proteoglycan extractability, and a decrease in proteoglycan aggregation through interaction with hyaluronic acid (although the hyaluronic acid content is typically in excess of that needed for maximum aggregation). Structural studies suggest that the non-aggregable proteoglycans lack a hyaluronate binding site, presumably because of enzytruitic scission of the core protein by stromelysin, an enzyme which is thought to play a major role in extracellular matrix degeneration. These proteoglycan changes are thought to precede the morphological reorganization usually attributed to degeneration. Secondary changes in the annulus include fibrocartilage production with disorganization of the lamellar architecture and increases in type II collagen.
Currently, there are few clinical options to offer to patients suffering from these conditions. These clinical options are all empirically based and include (1) conservative therapy with physical rehabilitation and (2) surgical intervention with possible disc removal and spinal fusion. In contrast to other joints, such as the hip and knee, very few methods of repair with restoration of function are not available for the spine.
Therefore, there is a need for a minimally invasive treatment for degenerated discs which can repair and regenerate the disc. The present invention satisfies that need, as well as others, and overcomes the deficiencies associated with conventional implants and treatment methods.
The present invention comprises an implant and minimally invasive method of treating degenerated discs which can repair and regenerate the disc. More particularly, the present invention comprises a bioactive/biodegradable nucleus implant and method of use. The implant is inflated inside the nucleus space after the degenerated nucleus has been removed to re-pressurize the nuclear space within the intervertebral disc. Nuclear pressure produces tension in the annular ligament that increases biomechanical stability and diminishes hydrostatic tissue pressure that can stimulate fibro-chondrocytes to produce inflammatory factors. The device will also increase disc height, separate the vertebral bodies and open the spinal foramina.
By way of example, and not of limitation, an implant according to the invention comprises a collapsible, textured or smooth membrane that forms an inflatable balloon or sack. To inflate the implant, the implant is filled with a high molecular weight fluid, gel or combination of fluid and elastomer, preferably an under-hydrated HA hydrogel/growth factor mixture with or without host cells. Integral to the membrane is a self-sealing valve that allows one-way filling of the implant after it is placed within the disc. The implant membrane is made from a material that allows fibrous in-growth thereby stabilizing the implant. A variety of substances can be incorporated into the device to promote healing, prevent infection, or arrest pain. The implant is inserted utilizing known microinvasive technology. Following partial or total nucleotomy with a small incision, typically annular, the deflated implant is inserted into the nuclear space through a cannula. The implant is then filled through a stem attached to the self-sealing valve. Once the implant is filled to the proper size and pressure, the cannula is removed and the annular defect is sealed.
One of the main difficulties in repairing the degenerated disc is increasing the disc height. The disc and surrounding tissues such as ligaments provide a great deal of resistance to disc heightening. For this reason it is unlikely that placing a hydrogel alone into the nuclear space will be able to generate enough swelling pressure to regain significant disc height. The present invention, however, addresses this problem by allowing initial high pressures to be generated when the implant is inflated in the nuclear space. The initial high pressure is sufficient to initiate the restoration of the original disc height. This initial boost in disc height facilitates the later regeneration stages of this treatment.
In the long term, having a permanent pressurized implant is not likely to be ideal because it may not be able to mimic the essential biomechanical properties of the normal disc. However, the invention also addresses this issue by using a biodegradable sack. The initially impermeable membrane permits high pressurization. When the membrane biodegrades, it allows the hydrogel mixture to take action in playing the role of the normal nucleus pulposus with its inherent swelling pressure and similar mechanical properties.
A variety of growth factors or other bioactive agents can be attached to the surface of the implant or included in the hydrogel mixture that is injected inside the implant. The membrane could be reinforced or not reinforced with a variety of fiber meshes if necessary. Furthermore, a variety of materials could be used for the membrane; the only requirement is that they be biodegradable such that the membrane is impermeable when initially implanted and until it biodegrades. A variety of materials could be injected into the sack such as cartilage cells, alginate gel, and growth factors.
An advantage of the invention is to provide for minimally invasive disk repair.
Another advantage of the invention is to provide a biodegradable implant.
Another advantage of the invention is to provide for restoration of disc height and normal disc biomechanics.
Another advantage of the invention is to provide for disk repair with no loss of mobility.
Another advantage of the invention is to provide for strong integration of an implant with surrounding tissue.
Another advantage of the invention is to provide for disk repair through the use of a very small incision in the annulus.
Another advantage of the invention is to provide an implant that has a bioactive surface.
Another advantage of the invention is to provide for disk repair with very low risk of re-herniation.
Another advantage of the invention is to provide a minimally invasive treatment for degenerated discs which can repair and regenerate the disc.
Another advantage of the invention is to provide a bioactive/biodegradable nucleus implant which can be inflated inside the nucleus space, such as after the degenerated nucleus has been removed.
Further advantages of the invention will be brought out in the following portions of the specification, wherein the detailed description is for the purpose of fully disclosing preferred embodiments of the invention without placing limitations thereon.
The invention will be more fully understood by reference to the following drawings which are for illustrative purposes only:
For illustrative purposes, the present invention is embodied in the method and apparatus described herein and generally shown in
Referring first to
Table 1 compares certain characteristics of the inner annulus to a number of commercially-available elastomers that were considered for the membrane material. Key design requirements were biocompatibility, stiffness, and elongation-to-failure. While any of these materials, as well as other materials, can be used, our preferred material was aliphatic polycarbonate polyurethane (HT-4) which has a stiffness that closely approximates that of the inner annulus, can be fabricated into complex shapes using dip molding, possess significant failure properties, and has a track-record for in vivo use.
The peripheral surface of the implant is preferably coated with one or more bioactive substances that will promote healing of the inner annulus and integration of the implant with the surrounding annular tissue. Also, the top and bottom surfaces of the implant are preferably coated with one or more bioactive substances that will promote healing of the cartilaginous endplates and integration of the implant with the endplates.
To limit the amount of lateral bulging when the implant is axially compressed, the peripheral surface of the implant can be reinforced with a fiber matrix if desired. In that event, the angle of the fibers relative to the vertical axis of placement should be approximately ±60° to closely approximate that of the native collagen fibers in the inner annulus.
Implant 10 includes an integral, internal, self-sealing, one-way valve 16 that will allow the implant to be inserted in a deflated state and then be inflated in situ without risk of deflation. Valve 16 functions as a flapper valve to prevent leakage and maintain pressurization of the implant when pressurized with the nuclear filler material. Because valve 16 is internal to the implant, compression of implant 10 will place internal pressure on valve 16 to keep it in a closed position. Due to the self-sealing nature of valve 16, the same pressure that might be sufficient to allow the nuclear filler material to escape will cause valve 16 to remain closed so as to create a barrier to extrusion.
To better understand the operation and configuration of valve 16, reference is now made to
To inflate the implant, a needle-like fill stem is inserted through entrance port 32 so as to puncture the distal end 34 of valve 16 and extend into the interior chamber of the implant. The implant is then filled with a fluid material, such as a high molecular weight fluid, gel or combination of fluid and elastomer which has a viscosity that will permit its introduction into the implant through, for example, an 18-gauge needle. The specific properties of filler material 14 should allow the material to achieve and maintain the desired osmotic pressure. The filling takes place after the implant is placed within the disc. Preferably filler material is a cross-linkable polyethylene glycol (PEG) hydrogel with chondroitin sulfate (CS) and hyaluronic acid (HA) with or without host cells as will now be described.
Table 2 shows the characteristics of a number of commercially-available hydrogels that were considered for filler material 14. While any of these materials, as well as other materials, can be used, we selected an in situ cross-linkable polyethylene glycol (PEG) gel because of its bio-compatibility and physical properties. The PEG gel is a two component formulation that becomes a low-viscosity fluid when first mixed and which cross-links to a firm gel after insertion. The cross-link time depends on the formulation. A key feature of the gel is its osmotic pressure. We sought to formulate a gel that would possess an osmotic pressure of near 0.2 MPa which is that of the native nucleus pulposus.
The preferred PEG gel comprises a nucleophilic “8-arm” octomer (PEG-NH2, MW 20 kDa) and a “2-arm” amine-specific electrophilic dimer (SPA-PEG-SPA, MW 3.4 kDa), and is available from Shearwater Corporation, Huntsville, Ala. The addition-elimination polymerization reaction culminates in a nitrogen-carbon peptide-like linkage, resulting in a stable polymer whose rate of polymerization increases with pH and gel concentration. The range of pH (approximately 10 for the unmodified gel) and concentration (approximately 0.036 g/mL to 0.100 g/mL) investigated resulted in a polymerization time of approximately 10 minutes to 20 minutes. To fortify the hydrogel's inherent swelling due to hydrogen bonding, high molecular weight additives chondroitin sulfate (CS) and hyaluronic acid (HA) with established fixed charged densities were incorporated into the gel matrix.
The swelling pressures of the hydrogel filler (cross-linked polyethylene glycol (PEG) hydrogels and derivatives incorporating HA and CS) were measured by equilibrium dialysis as a function of gel and additive concentration. Polyethylene glycol (Molecular Weight 20 kDa available from Sigma-Aldrich Corporation) was also used as the osmotic stressing agent, while molecularporous membrane tubing was used to separate sample gels from the dialysate. Gels were formed over a broad concentration range (0.036 to 0.100 g/mL), weighed, placed in dialysis tubing (Spectra/Por Membrane, Molecular Weight Cut Off of 3.5 kDa available from Spectrum Medical Industries), and allowed to equilibrate for 40 to 50 hours in the osmotic stressing solution, weighed again to determine hydration, then oven dried (at 60 degrees Celsius) and weighed once again. Hydration values taken at various osmotic pressures allowed the construction of osmotic pressure curves. By adjusting the concentrations of CS or HA we were able to meet our design criteria, successfully achieving swelling pressures above 0.2 MPa. A potential deleterious interaction between the elastomer and hydrogel was noted. One PEG-CS specimen aged in saline demonstrated breakdown of the elastomer shell. This may have been due to the relatively low-molecular weight CS penetrating into the membrane material (polyurethane) leading to an increased rate of hydrolysis.
Referring now to
An inner passage 52 extends through inner annular buttress 42 for attachment to buttress positioner 40 and insertion of fill stem 38 through inner annular buttress 42 into implant 10. Inner passage 52, head portion 44 and body portion 46 are preferably coaxial. Buttress positioner 40 and inner annular buttress 42 are coupled together using mating threads 54a, 54b or another form of detachable coupling that allows buttress positioner 40 to be easily removed from inner annular buttress 42 after placement. Note that inner annular buttress 42 can be attached to implant 10 using adhesives, ultrasonic welding or the like, or can be separate and unattached from implant 10.
Fill stem 38 includes a collar 56 for attachment to a syringe 58 or other device to be used for inflating the implant with the filler material. Fill stem 38 and syringe 58 are coupled together using threads (not shown) or another form of detachable coupling. Preferably, syringe 58 includes a pressure gauge (not shown) for determining the proper inflation pressure. The implant and delivery system would be deployed into the nucleus pulposus space by being inserted into a conventional catheter, cannula or the like (not shown) having a retractable cover (not shown) that protects the implant during insertion.
As shown in
The referred protocol for creating a nuclear space for the implant comprises making a small puncture within the annulus with a pointed, 3 mm diameter probe. This pointed probe serves to separate annular fibers and minimize damage to the annulus. Next, a portion of the nucleus is removed using standard surgical instruments. The Coblation probe is then inserted. Suction and saline delivery are available with the probe, although we have found that suction through another portal using, for example, a 16-gage needle, may be required. A critical feature of device success is the method of creating a nuclear space while minimizing trauma to the outer annulus fibrosus. The outer annulus should be preserved, as it is responsible for supporting the implant when pressurized.
Next, as shown in
The catheter and delivery system (e.g., fill stem 38 and buttress positioner 40) are then removed, leaving inner annular buttress 42 in place and implant 10 sealed in position as shown in
Finally,
It will be appreciated that the implant can be inserted using other procedures as well. For example, instead of performing a discectomy (posterolateral or otherwise), the implant could be inserted into a preexisting void within the annulus that arises from atrophy or other form of non-device-induced evacuation of the nucleus pulposus, such as for, example, by leakage or dehydration over time.
Prototype implant shells were fabricated by Apex Biomedical (San Diego, Calif.). The fabrication process included dip molding using a custom-fabricated mandrel. The mandrel was dipped so that the elastomer thickness was between 5 and 7 mils (0.13-0.17 mm). After dipping, the implant was removed from the mandrel, inverted (so that the stem was inside the implant) and heat-sealed at the open end. This process resulted in a prototype that could be filled with the PEG gel, which when cross-linked could not exit through the implant stem. The stem effectively sealed the implant by functioning as a “flapper valve”. This means that by being placed within the implant, internal pressures (that might serve to extrude the gel) compress and seal the stem, creating a barrier to extrusion. This sealing mechanism was verified by in vitro testing.
Elastomer bags filled with PEG were compressed to failure between two parallel platens. The implants failed at the heat seal at approximately 250 Newtons force. These experiments demonstrated that under hyper-pressurization, the failure mechanism was rupture at the sealed edge, rather than extrusion of gel through the insertion stem. When the device is placed within the intervertebral disc, support by the annulus and vertebral body results in a significantly increased failure load and altered construct failure mechanism.
Ex vivo mechanical testing were performed with human cadaveric spines to characterize the performance of the device under expected extreme in vivo conditions. We conducted a series of experiments that consisted of placing the device in human cadaveric discs using the developed surgical protocols and then testing the construct to failure under compressive loading. The objective of these experiments was to characterize the failure load and failure mechanism. The target failure load was to exceed five times body weight (anticipated extremes of in vivo loading). Importantly, the failure mode was to be endplate fracture and extrusion of the implant into the adjacent vertebra. This is the mode of disc injury in healthy spines. We did not want the construct to fail by extrusion through the annulus, particularly through the insertion hole, since this would place the hydrogel in close proximity to sensitive neural structures.
Load-to-failure experiments demonstrated that the implant may sustain in excess of 5000 N (approximately seven times body weight) before failure, and that the failure mode was endplate fracture. These preliminary experiments demonstrate that the implant can sustain extremes in spinal compression acutely.
Referring now to
Referring to
Referring now to
As can be seen from
Although the description above contains many specificities, these should not be construed as limiting the scope of the invention but as merely providing illustrations of some of the presently preferred embodiments of this invention. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that other materials, structures, components, and configurations can be employed without departing from the invention. For example, collagen could be used instead of polymer, and polylysine or type 2 collagen with a cross-linking agent could be used instead of hydrogel. Therefore, it will be appreciated that the scope of the present invention fully encompasses other embodiments which may become obvious to those skilled in the art, and that the scope of the present invention is accordingly to be limited by nothing other than the appended claims, in which reference to an element in the singular is not intended to mean “one and only one” unless explicitly so stated, but rather “one or more.” All structural, chemical, and functional equivalents to the elements of the above-described preferred embodiment that are known to those of ordinary skill in the art are expressly incorporated herein by reference and are intended to be encompassed by the present claims. Moreover, it is not necessary for a device or method to address each and every problem sought to be solved by the present invention, for it to be encompassed by the present claims. Furthermore, no element, component, or method step in the present disclosure is intended to be dedicated to the public regardless of whether the element, component, or method step is explicitly recited in the claims. No claim element herein is to be construed under the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, unless the element is expressly recited using the phrase “means for.”
This application is a divisional of application Ser. No. 10/154,857, filed on May 24, 2002, now U.S. Pat. No. 7,156,877, incorporated herein by reference in its entirety, which claims priority from U.S. provisional application Ser. No. 60/301,882, filed on Jun. 29, 2001, incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3867728 | Stubstad et al. | Feb 1975 | A |
| 3875595 | Froning | Apr 1975 | A |
| 4309777 | Patil | Jan 1982 | A |
| 4341218 | U | Jul 1982 | A |
| 4349921 | Kuntz | Sep 1982 | A |
| 4364392 | Strother et al. | Dec 1982 | A |
| 4517979 | Pecenka | May 1985 | A |
| 4697584 | Haynes | Oct 1987 | A |
| 4714469 | Kenna | Dec 1987 | A |
| 4772287 | Ray et al. | Sep 1988 | A |
| 4904260 | Ray et al. | Feb 1990 | A |
| 4911718 | Lee et al. | Mar 1990 | A |
| 4932969 | Frey et al. | Jun 1990 | A |
| 4932975 | Main et al. | Jun 1990 | A |
| 4944749 | Becker | Jul 1990 | A |
| 5047055 | Bao et al. | Sep 1991 | A |
| 5084061 | Gau et al. | Jan 1992 | A |
| 5108404 | Scholten et al. | Apr 1992 | A |
| 5108430 | Ravo | Apr 1992 | A |
| 5108438 | Stone | Apr 1992 | A |
| 5141508 | Bark et al. | Aug 1992 | A |
| 5144708 | Pekar | Sep 1992 | A |
| 5171280 | Baumgartner | Dec 1992 | A |
| 5171281 | Parsons et al. | Dec 1992 | A |
| 5181921 | Makita et al. | Jan 1993 | A |
| 5192326 | Bao et al. | Mar 1993 | A |
| 5219360 | Georgiade | Jun 1993 | A |
| 5258043 | Stone | Nov 1993 | A |
| 5314478 | Oka et al. | May 1994 | A |
| 5458643 | Oka et al. | Oct 1995 | A |
| 5496370 | Hamas | Mar 1996 | A |
| 5522899 | Michelson | Jun 1996 | A |
| 5534028 | Bao et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
| 5534030 | Navarro et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
| 5545229 | Parsons et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
| 5549679 | Kuslich | Aug 1996 | A |
| 5556429 | Felt | Sep 1996 | A |
| 5562736 | Ray et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
| 5571189 | Kuslich | Nov 1996 | A |
| 5632777 | Petrick | May 1997 | A |
| 5645597 | Krapiva | Jul 1997 | A |
| 5674295 | Ray et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
| 5674296 | Bryan et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
| 5700288 | Eaton | Dec 1997 | A |
| 5702454 | Baumgartner | Dec 1997 | A |
| 5716416 | Lin | Feb 1998 | A |
| 5755797 | Baumgartner | May 1998 | A |
| 5779672 | Dormandy, Jr. | Jul 1998 | A |
| 5795353 | Felt | Aug 1998 | A |
| 5800549 | Bao et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
| 5823852 | Chu | Oct 1998 | A |
| 5824093 | Ray et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
| 5871777 | Ducheyne et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
| 5888220 | Felt et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
| 5919235 | Husson et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
| 5964807 | Gan et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
| 5976186 | Bao et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
| 5980504 | Sharkey et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
| 6022376 | Assell et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
| 6079868 | Rydell | Jun 2000 | A |
| 6093205 | McLeod et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
| 6095149 | Sharkey et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
| 6099514 | Sharkey et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
| 6113639 | Ray et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
| 6139579 | Steffee et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
| 6140452 | Felt et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
| 6149688 | Brosnahan et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
| 6156067 | Bryan et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
| 6162252 | Kuras et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
| 6193757 | Foley et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
| 6224630 | Bao et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
| 6248131 | Felt et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
| 6280475 | Bao et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
| 6306177 | Felt et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
| 6375682 | Fleischmann et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
| 6402784 | Wardlaw | Jun 2002 | B1 |
| 6443988 | Felt et al. | Sep 2002 | B2 |
| 6565606 | Bruce et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
| 6582467 | Teitelbaum et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
| 6805715 | Reuter et al. | Oct 2004 | B2 |
| 20010031974 | Hadlock et al. | Oct 2001 | A1 |
| 20010034526 | Kuslich et al. | Oct 2001 | A1 |
| 20020068975 | Teitelbaum et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
| 20020082638 | Porter et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
| 20020147496 | Belef et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020147497 | Belef et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20030199984 | Trieu | Oct 2003 | A1 |
| 20030220649 | Bao et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
| 20040024463 | Thomas, Jr. et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
| 20040034427 | Goel et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
| 20040073308 | Kuslich et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 0700671 | Mar 1996 | EP |
| 0919209 | Jun 1999 | EP |
| 2639823 | Dec 1988 | FR |
| 2303555 | Feb 1997 | GB |
| 9108560 | Jun 1991 | WO |
| 9531946 | Nov 1995 | WO |
| 9720569 | Dec 1997 | WO |
| 9855053 | Oct 1998 | WO |
| 9902108 | Jan 1999 | WO |
| 9915211 | Jan 1999 | WO |
| 9904720 | Apr 1999 | WO |
| 9937395 | Jul 1999 | WO |
| 9947082 | Sep 1999 | WO |
| 9985863 | Oct 1999 | WO |
| 9961084 | Dec 1999 | WO |
| 9962439 | Dec 1999 | WO |
| 0002999 | Jan 2000 | WO |
| 0004851 | Feb 2000 | WO |
| 0025706 | May 2000 | WO |
| 0064385 | Nov 2000 | WO |
| 0128468 | Apr 2001 | WO |
| 0160268 | Aug 2001 | WO |
| 0217825 | Mar 2002 | WO |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20060293751 A1 | Dec 2006 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 60301882 | Jun 2001 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | 10154857 | May 2002 | US |
| Child | 11505783 | US |
