This invention relates to the material disclosed and claimed in a co-pending patent application by the same inventor entitled “Non Cannulated Dilators” and bearing Ser. No. 10/021,809 and incorporated herein by reference.
This invention relates to medical instruments for use in surgical procedures and more particularly to a wide-channel cannula that is pre-sized, pre-configured and tailored to conform to the patient's anatomy.
In one aspect of this invention, the invention considers the anatomical shape of the area of the patient being operated on and tailors the shape of the dilators and the dilator retractor or cannula to accommodate that shape. In another aspect of this invention, the invention constitutes an improvement over the apparatus and method disclosed and claimed in U.S. Pat. No. 6,159,179 granted on Dec. 12, 2000 to the inventor of this patent application and entitled “Cannula and Sizing and Insertion Method” by providing different sizes of the same configuration of dilator retractors.
As is well known by those skilled in this technology, the cannula utilized in the field of minimally invasive surgery is particularly efficacious in performing such spinal medical procedures as laminotomy, medial facetectomy, foraminotomy, nerve root retraction, discectomy and the like, is cylindrically shaped. I have found that a cylindrically shaped cannula is not always ideal for certain surgical procedures and this invention is intended to obviate the problems incidental to a cylindrically shaped cannula and to increase the number of surgical procedures that can be performed by dilation methods by changing the configuration of the retractor tube or cannula. As is apparent to one skilled in this technology, the anatomy of the human spine is not made up of flat surfaces and a purely cylindrical device passed over cylindrical dilators and directed toward the lamina more likely than not settles off of or partly on the bone. When this occurs, a tuft of muscle migrates to or is left between the bone and the bottom of the retractor and must be removed surgically. Obviously, this surgery is a source of pain and discomfort for the patient and creates an additional surgical step for the surgeon. Moreover, this additional surgery causes additional bleeding and as a consequence, creates an obstruction to the vision of the surgeon. In order to cure the obstruction, the surgeon must address this problem through an electro cautery procedure.
Also apparent to one skilled in this technology is that the pathological target within the patient is often not an equal distance vertically and horizontally. Hence, a surgical procedure may require a surgical approach that for ideal conditions, provides access that is more vertical in orientation than lateral. Obviously, a cylindrical device as has been heretofore available and as disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 6,159,179 supra, which is equidistant from the axis, does not allow for this approach. Thus, in a cylindrical cannula, in order to gain additional vertical access the size of the cannula must be increased the same amount in the lateral direction that it is in the vertical direction. Obviously, the human spine's skeletal structure, i.e. lateral facets and medial spinous process, restricts the amount of lateral space available. In a cylindrical cannula, since a limitation of the lateral space that is available to locate a retractor, the vertical space is likewise limited. As a consequence, the cylindrical cannula limits the number of patients who are candidates for minimally invasive spinal surgery necessitating the more invasive type surgery with all of the problems associated therewith. Hence, for a large segment of the patient population, the only surgery available is the more destructive invasive muscle burning and stripping approach. This invention addresses this problem and provides a solution whereby the minimal invasive surgery is now possible which otherwise was considered impossible to perform, unpractical or unpredictable in terms of surgical success or long-term outcome.
The other aspect of this invention is the improvement to the system claimed in U.S. Pat. No. 6,159,179, supra. In this patent, the depth of the cavity at the location where the invasive procedure is being performed is measured and the surgeon can then select from a kit or inventory of different sized cannulas or retractors the desired size required to perform the surgical procedure.
I have found that a solution to the problem noted in the immediate above paragraphs is that I provide in one embodiment of this invention, dilators and retractors that are configured other than in a cylindrical shape, such as an ovoid, and that I provide different sizes to meet the anatomical needs of a particular patient. By providing dilators and dilator retractors made in accordance with this invention, these instruments will be able to reach down between the facet joint and the spinous process to gently part muscle tissue and come into closer contact to the bony target. This will reduce or eliminate the need for the surgeon to surgically remove otherwise valuable viable muscle tissue. This will also reduce post-operative pain and inter-operative time (fiddle). In addition to the above, this new design will allow surgeons to address new pathologies in patients that previously would not have been able to undergo a minimally invasive technique. To more fully appreciate the importance of this invention a common example is discussed immediately hereinbelow.
This example considers a patient with multilevel central canal stenosis. To address this patient's pathology, the surgeon may need over 35 millimeters (mm) of vertical access. The typical lateral distance, i.e., space between the spinous process and the facet joint, available at the L4 lamina is 16 mm. A 16 mm cylindrical retractor would fit tightly against the lamina but even with “wanding” (moving up and down) it would restrict the surgeons ability to reach much more than the 16 mm in vertical access. The only option that is available to the surgeon, heretofore, is to utilize a cylindrical retractor. As explained above, since the equation for a cylindrical retractor mandates that the lateral and vertical expansions are equal, the cylindrical retractor would quickly reach beyond the practical or acceptable size for many, if not most, multilevel patient candidates.
Another embodiment of this invention is the contouring or configuring of the bottom of the retractor in order to meet the requirements of certain operation procedures and/or permit the retractor to be positioned closer to the target. This invention contemplates angling the tip in both a cylindrical and ovoid shaped retractor and/or locating a tunnel in the bottom thereof which allows for a rod or implant to be passed through the distal tip of the cannula and into a pedicle screw.
While much has been accomplished in the medical field to limit tissue disruption, use minimal incisions, reduce the hospital stay and increase the speed in which the patient recovers, this invention is intended to raise the surgical procedure to a higher level. This invention in the field of minimally invasive surgery is particularly efficacious in performing such spinal medical procedures as laminotomy, medial facetectomy, foraminotomy, nerve root retraction, discectomy and the like.
As discussed in U.S. Pat. No. 6,159,179, supra, atypical procedure in performing a lumbar discectomy is to advance a guidewire through a small incision which is advanced to the inferior edge of the superior lamina. A small incision is then made that extends either cranially or caudally. A dilator is then inserted over the guidewire. Larger diameter dilators are sequentially inserted over each other to increase the opening into the body cavity. Typically the guide wire is removed after the first dilator is installed and eventually the dilators are all removed after the tubular retractor has been inserted over the largest of the dilators. Once these procedures are accomplished, the retractor is locked into position by a retractor clamp that is clamped to a retractor clamping arm which is fixed to a rigid member such as the operating table. This provides an unencumbered zone where the surgeon can perform the medical procedure that was intended to be performed. According to the present invention, the dilators, of course will now conform to the configuration discussed above.
Instead of sizing the cannula to the largest depth that is anticipated in the surgical procedure, the U.S. Pat. No. 6,159,179 patent, supra, teaches providing to the surgeon a series of different sizes in a kit so that the surgeon can measure the depth of the cavity of the patient and select the requisite size from the kit. Hence, the surgeon measures the depth by measuring from the exterior of the cavity to the most interior position in the cavity (inferior edge of the superior lamina) and then selects, for example, either a 10 millimeters (mm), 20 mm, 30 mm, etc. as the situation requires. The dilator retractor will also have the same cross sectional shape as the dilator, but it may have a predetermined configuration at the distal end. This invention improves the state of the art of spinal surgery by expanding the current boundaries of minimally invasive surgery. This provides a new option to patients that would otherwise be delegated to the more disruptive open muscle stripping surgical approaches. The ovoid design with or without the angled distal tip, allows a surgeon greater vertical access without having to be encumbered by unnecessary lateral access.
Also, it is contemplated within the scope of this invention, that the dilator retractor will be provided in a kit where a given configuration will be provided in a series of dilator retractors that have different lengths, so that the depth of the cavity of the patient will determine the particular sized dilator retractor that will be utilized for that procedure.
An object of this invention is to provide a cannula used in minimally invasive technique that is tailored for a patient and pathology.
A feature of this invention is to provide an ovoid shaped retractor and a complementary shaped dilators. Other configurations that are not cylindrical are contemplated within the scope of this invention.
Another feature of this invention is to contour the tip of the distal end of the retractor to match the bone structure in the patient.
Another feature of this invention is to provide an access channel at the distal end of the retractor to allow passage of medical hardware.
Another feature of this invention is to provide retractors that are made from a series of predetermined sizes having tailored contouring that the surgeon can select to match the depth of the cavity in the patient made by the dilator.
The foregoing and other features of the present invention will become more apparent from the following description and accompanying drawings.
These figures merely serve to further clarify and illustrate the present invention and are not intended to limit the scope thereof
While the preferred embodiment of this invention is described herein, it will be appreciated, as one skilled in this art will recognize, that the invention although directed toward non-cylindrically shaped dilator retractors, under certain circumstances, the invention contemplates cylindrically shaped dilator retractors where the bottom or distal end is configured to accommodate the shape of the bone structure of the patient or to accommodate different procedures that are available to the surgeon. As for example, the distal end of a cylindrically shaped dilator retractor may be tunneled so as to allow the insertion of an implant. The terms “cannula” and “dilator retractor” have the same meaning and are used herein interchangeably. The term cavity as used herein means the cavity that is created by the dilators and when the dilator retractor is inserted in this cavity it becomes a working channel for the surgeons use in performing the minimal invasive surgery. While the invention is particularly efficacious for use in performing minimal invasive surgery, as would be obvious to any skilled artisan, this invention would also be useful for other types of surgery.
While in the preferred embodiment the description of this invention details the use of a non cannulated dilator of the type described and claimed in the Cross Reference of this patent application and which is incorporated herein by reference, as one skilled in the art will appreciate, this invention also contemplates the use of a guide wire for certain surgical procedures.
To better understand this invention reference is made to the prior art configuration of a dilator retractor as viewed in the target area of a patient. In this example, the patient is inflicted with a herniated disc in the spinal column and the surgeon targets the posterior portion of the vertebra to perform the surgical procedure. The dilator retractor or cannula 10 is inserted in the body and up to where the distal end rests on the bone structure. Obviously, there is a space from left to right between the bone and the end of the dilator retractor and as mentioned above, tufts of muscle remains in or migrates to this area. The surgeon needs to remove this material before performing the procedure for repairing the herniated disc to the discomfort of the patient.
In accordance with one embodiment of this invention and as best seen in
As mentioned in the Background section of this patent application, in accordance with this invention the distal ends of the dilator retractors are “tailored” to meet certain criteria resulting from the anatomical structure of the target area of the patient.
The dilator retractor 54 of
It is apparent from the foregoing and particularly with the embodiments depicted in
What has been shown by this invention is a novel, unique and functional dilator retractor that is “tailored” to meet the anatomical configuration of the patient. In addition, each of the configured dilator retractors are sized so that they conform to the depth of the cavity in which they are inserted into the patient. In addition to the benefits of these configured dilator retractors that have been enumerated above, these dilator retractors and the dilators associated therewith, afford opportunities to the surgeon to operate in areas of the spine that were not operable with minimal invasive surgery heretofore or at best were operable with a given risk.
Although this invention has been shown and described with respect to detailed embodiments thereof, it will be appreciated and understood by those skilled in the art that various changes in form and detail thereof may be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the claimed invention.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
569839 | Roeloffs | Oct 1896 | A |
3470872 | Grieshaber | Oct 1969 | A |
3875595 | Froning | Apr 1975 | A |
4232660 | Coles | Nov 1980 | A |
4440168 | Warren | Apr 1984 | A |
4481947 | Chester | Nov 1984 | A |
4545374 | Jacobson | Oct 1985 | A |
4573448 | Kambin | Mar 1986 | A |
4617922 | Griggs | Oct 1986 | A |
4620460 | Gonzales, Jr. | Nov 1986 | A |
4736738 | Lipovsek | Apr 1988 | A |
4747394 | Watanabe | May 1988 | A |
4798111 | Cheeseman | Jan 1989 | A |
4803976 | Frigg | Feb 1989 | A |
4817587 | Janese | Apr 1989 | A |
4862891 | Smith | Sep 1989 | A |
4863423 | Wallace | Sep 1989 | A |
4882958 | McNeeley | Nov 1989 | A |
5035232 | Lutze | Jul 1991 | A |
5048379 | Gramera | Sep 1991 | A |
5052373 | Michelson | Oct 1991 | A |
5084043 | Hertzmann | Jan 1992 | A |
5098435 | Stednitz | Mar 1992 | A |
5106376 | Mononen et al. | Apr 1992 | A |
5133720 | Greenberg | Jul 1992 | A |
5135525 | Biscoping | Aug 1992 | A |
5148724 | Rexford | Sep 1992 | A |
5158543 | Lazarus | Oct 1992 | A |
5171279 | Mathews | Dec 1992 | A |
5195541 | Obenchain | Mar 1993 | A |
5275611 | Behl | Jan 1994 | A |
5279567 | Ciaglia | Jan 1994 | A |
5292309 | Van Tassel | Mar 1994 | A |
5303694 | Mikhail | Apr 1994 | A |
5312360 | Behl | May 1994 | A |
5356413 | Martins et al. | Oct 1994 | A |
5363841 | Coker | Nov 1994 | A |
5431639 | Shaw | Jul 1995 | A |
5431651 | Goble | Jul 1995 | A |
D361381 | Koros | Aug 1995 | S |
5439464 | Shapiro | Aug 1995 | A |
5472426 | Bonati et al. | Dec 1995 | A |
5489274 | Chu et al. | Feb 1996 | A |
5512038 | O'Neal | Apr 1996 | A |
5569248 | Mathews | Oct 1996 | A |
5601550 | Esser | Feb 1997 | A |
5611778 | Brinon | Mar 1997 | A |
5687739 | McPherson | Nov 1997 | A |
5716415 | Steffee | Feb 1998 | A |
5728097 | Mathews | Mar 1998 | A |
5743853 | Lauderdale | Apr 1998 | A |
5746720 | Stouder, Jr. | May 1998 | A |
5766221 | Benderev | Jun 1998 | A |
5792044 | Foley et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
D399955 | Koros | Oct 1998 | S |
5816257 | Chin | Oct 1998 | A |
RE36020 | Moore | Dec 1998 | E |
5851207 | Cesarone | Dec 1998 | A |
5882344 | Stouder, Jr. | Mar 1999 | A |
5885300 | Tokuhashi | Mar 1999 | A |
5891147 | Moskovitz | Apr 1999 | A |
5895352 | Kleiner | Apr 1999 | A |
5895390 | Moran | Apr 1999 | A |
5897593 | Kohrs | Apr 1999 | A |
5899901 | Middleton | May 1999 | A |
5902231 | Foley | May 1999 | A |
5913818 | Co | Jun 1999 | A |
5928139 | Koros | Jul 1999 | A |
5944658 | Koros | Aug 1999 | A |
5954635 | Foley et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5954671 | O'Neill | Sep 1999 | A |
5967970 | Cowan | Oct 1999 | A |
5971920 | Nagel | Oct 1999 | A |
5976146 | Ogawa et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5996447 | Bayouth | Dec 1999 | A |
6007487 | Foley | Dec 1999 | A |
6010520 | Pattison | Jan 2000 | A |
6033406 | Mathews | Mar 2000 | A |
6063088 | Winslow | May 2000 | A |
6080155 | Michelson | Jun 2000 | A |
6081741 | Hollis | Jun 2000 | A |
6083225 | Winslow | Jul 2000 | A |
6113602 | Sand | Sep 2000 | A |
6120434 | Kimura | Sep 2000 | A |
6120506 | Kohrs | Sep 2000 | A |
D433296 | Yamakawa | Nov 2000 | S |
6152871 | Foley | Nov 2000 | A |
6156006 | Brosens | Dec 2000 | A |
6159179 | Simonson | Dec 2000 | A |
6162170 | Foley et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6162236 | Osada | Dec 2000 | A |
D436513 | Yamakawa | Jan 2001 | S |
6176823 | Foley | Jan 2001 | B1 |
D438074 | Marr | Feb 2001 | S |
6197002 | Peterson | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6206822 | Foley et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6206826 | Mathews | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6206885 | Ghahremani | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6214004 | Coker | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6217509 | Foley et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6224597 | Coker | May 2001 | B1 |
6224608 | Ciccolella | May 2001 | B1 |
6245072 | Zdeblick | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6258097 | Cook | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6267763 | Castro | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6270498 | Michaelson | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6283966 | Houfburg | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6287313 | Sasso | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6296609 | Brau | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6312432 | Leppelmeier | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6342057 | Brace | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6348058 | Melkent | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6354176 | Nordlin | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6371959 | Trice | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6371968 | Kogasaka | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6418821 | Yamakawa | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6428472 | Haas | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6461330 | Miyagi | Oct 2002 | B1 |
D466766 | Marty | Dec 2002 | S |
6520907 | Foley | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6530926 | Davison | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6540756 | Vaughan | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6692434 | Ritland | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6793656 | Mathews | Sep 2004 | B1 |
20010012942 | Estes | Aug 2001 | A1 |
20010027320 | Sasso | Oct 2001 | A1 |
20020011135 | Hall | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020016592 | Branch | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020022764 | Smith | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020049368 | Ritland | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020058948 | Arlettaz | May 2002 | A1 |
20020077632 | Tsou | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020082695 | Neumann | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020123668 | Ritland | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020143235 | Pagliuca | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20030083689 | Simonson | May 2003 | A1 |
20030187431 | Simonson | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030220689 | Ritland | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030236447 | Ritland | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040106997 | Lieberson | Jun 2004 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
WO 0018306 | Apr 2000 | WO |
WO 02060330 | Aug 2002 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20030083688 A1 | May 2003 | US |