This invention relates to medical devices and methods, and more particularly to medical instruments and methods used when repairing defects on a tissue surface such as bone or cartilage.
Medical implants are often delivered to anatomical sites within a patient's body to treat focal defects. For example, damaged cartilage or bone within a patient's body may include a cavity or void formed by trauma, disease, or surgery. The cavity or void may leave the bone prone to further injury or damage, especially when the cavity or void is formed in a weight-bearing joint such as the knee. To treat such a defect, the affected tissue may be drilled out or otherwise prepared to receive an implant designed to promote tissue formation. The implant may comprise healthy cartilage and/or bone cut from other locations on the patient's body, tissue(s) harvested from a donor, and/or synthetic material(s) such as porous ceramics or metals, biocompatible polymers, or combinations thereof.
Preparing a defect to receive an implant can be a challenging task. Ideally, the defect should be prepared to a size and shape corresponding to that of the implant. This includes not only the dimensions of the prepared cavity, but also its orientation relative to the surrounding tissue surface. For example, bone plugs and similar implants are often cut from bone at angles substantially perpendicular to the surface of the bone. If such a bone plug is delivered into a cavity drilled at an angle to the surrounding surface, the end of the bone plug may not properly correspond to the surrounding surface. Portions of the bone plug may extend out of the cavity (i.e., be “proud”) so as to create an undesirable protrusion relative to the surrounding surface. Alternatively or additionally, portions of the bone plug may be recessed relative to the surrounding surface such that a defect in the bone remains.
Conventional techniques for properly orienting an instrument, such as a cutting tool, relative to a tissue surface rely solely upon visual and/or tactile feedback. After placing the cutting tool in contact with the tissue surface, a surgeon may simply change the angle of the cutting tool until she believes it looks or feels perpendicular to the tissue surface. The surgeon then attempts to maintain this orientation throughout the procedure. As can be appreciated, such techniques involve a great degree of approximation and may still result in cavities with undesirable orientations. Moreover, oftentimes the surgeon cannot directly view the tissue surface (e.g., because the procedure is performed arthroscopically). Attempting to properly orient a cutting tool while looking through an arthroscope can be even more challenging due to the magnification of the arthroscope.
As a result, various devices have been developed to facilitate preparing a defect to receive an implant. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 5,885,293 to McDevitt discloses a tool for cutting bone surfaces at perpendicular angles. The tool includes a cylindrical bone cutter, a cylindrical housing mounted on a handle of the bone cutter, a probe that slides within an inner bore of the bone cutter and the housing, and a ring on the exterior of the housing connected to the probe by a pin extending through the housing. The probe is biased to normally extend beyond the end of the bone cutter. When the bone cutter is placed against a bone surface, the probe is displaced into the inner bore. This displacement causes the ring to slide along the exterior of the housing, which includes indicia so that the displacement of the probe may be viewed. A surgeon manipulates the tool until maximum displacement is achieved, which, according to McDevitt, which generally corresponds to perpendicular alignment.
Although McDevitt offers an alternative to conventional techniques for orienting a tool relative to a bone surface, there remains room for improvement. The maximum displacement of a single probe may not always provide a reliable indication of perpendicular alignment. This is particularly true when using the tool disclosed in McDevitt to determine the proper orientation for repairing a defect on a tissue surface. For example, because the probe is a cylindrical element that slides along the center axis of the bone cutter, the probe is likely to contact the cavity defining the defect when the bone cutter is brought into contact with the bone surface. The maximum displacement of the probe found after manipulating the bone cutter may not necessarily reflect perpendicular alignment due to the differences (e.g. irregularities) between the defect and the profile of the surrounding surface.
Accordingly, an improved instrument to determine the proper orientation for repairing a defect on a tissue surface would be highly desirable.
Medical instruments and methods used when repairing defects on a tissue surface are described below. The instruments and methods are particularly suited to facilitate repairing defects on irregular surfaces (e.g., multi-radii, articular, and similar surfaces), although the instruments and methods may also be used in connection with other tissue surfaces. Additionally, the instruments may serve a variety purposes. The instruments described below may be used, for example, as an implant delivery device, punch, drill, guide tube, tamp, sleeve, obturator, cutting device, or some combination thereof.
In one embodiment, an instrument for determining the proper orientation for repairing a defect site on a tissue surface generally comprises a shaft, a plurality of probes operatively coupled to the shaft, and at least one indicator operatively coupled to the plurality of probes. The shaft includes a first end configured to contact the tissue surface and a second end opposite the first end. Each of the probes is moveable relative to the shaft and configured to extend beyond the first end. Because the indicator is configured to display the displacements of the probes relative to the first end, the displacements of the probes may be compared. There may be a single indicator or a plurality of indicators corresponding to the plurality of probes.
In another embodiment, the instrument is provided as part of an assembly that further includes a defect preparation tool. The shaft in such an embodiment may be a cannula defined by an outer wall surrounding a central bore. The defect preparation tool, which may be inserted through the central bore, is configured to prepare the defect site for receiving an implant. Alternatively or additionally, the implant may be provided as part of the assembly. The implant is configured to be received within the central bore of the shaft and is delivered to the defect site through the central bore.
One method of using the type of instrument described above generally comprises positioning the instrument proximate to a patient's body and contacting the tissue surface with the first end of the shaft and the plurality of probes. The displacement of each probe relative to the first end is transmitted to the at least one indicator. A user then determines the angle of the shaft relative to the tissue surface based on displacement information displayed or otherwise communicated by the at least one indicator. If necessary, the user adjusts the angle of the shaft relative to the tissue surface until a desired orientation is achieved.
When there is a plurality of indicators each configured to display the displacement information of one of the probes, the angle of the shaft may be determined by viewing the displacement information of each probe. After comparing the displacement information of at least two of the probes, the angle of the shaft may be adjusted until the displacements of the at least two probes are substantially equal.
In another embodiment, the method may further comprise substantially maintaining the shaft at a desired angle (e.g., 90°) relative to the tissue surface. The shaft may be a cannula defined by an outer wall surrounding a central bore. After inserting a defect preparation tool through the central bore, the defect site on the tissue surface is prepared to receive an implant. To this end, the defect preparation tool may be subsequently removed from the shaft so that the implant may be inserted into the central bore and delivered to the defect site through the shaft.
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
  
The instrument 10 includes a shaft 20 having a first end 22 configured to contact the tissue surface 14 and a second end 24 opposite the first end 22. In the illustrative embodiment shown, the shaft 20 is a cannula defined by an outer wall 26 surrounding a central bore 28. The first end 22, which may be beveled or flat, has a first diameter and the second end 24 has a second diameter larger than the first diameter. As a result, the second end 24 defines a flange portion 30. The flange portion 30 terminates in an upper surface 32 and the first end 22 terminates in a lower surface 34. Although the entire shaft 20 is shown as being transparent (for reasons discussed below), in other embodiments the shaft 20 may only be transparent in select areas or not transparent at all.
A plurality of probes 40 are operatively coupled to the shaft 20 and configured to extend beyond the first end 22. For example, the probes 40 may be partially received in a plurality of channels 42 extending into the outer wall 26 from the lower surface 34. The number of probes 40 and their spacing relative to each other may vary. 
The probes 40 are movable relative to the shaft 20, and the displacement of each probe 40 relative to the first end 22 is communicated to at least one indicator 50. 
For example, as shown in 
First, 
The fluid 62 is maintained within the channel 60 by first and second plunger elements 66, 68 that seal, engage, and move within the channel 60. The first plunger element 66 is positioned proximate to the first end 22 and coupled to the probe 58. As a result, the probe 58 displaces the first plunger element 66 within the channel 60 when moving relative to the first end 22. The fluid 62 within the channel 60 communicates this displacement to the second plunger element 68, which is positioned in the upper portion 64 of the channel 60. As shown in 
With reference to 
The tip portion 88, end portion 90, and a middle portion 92 therebetween may comprise the same or different materials. In one embodiment, the tip portion 88 comprises a first material and the middle portion 92 and/or end portion 90 comprises a second material that is less rigid than the first material. For example, the first material may be steel or titanium and the second material may be nitinol. It will be appreciated that the first material is selected to provide the tip portion 88 with sufficient rigidity so as to be effectively displaced within the channel 82 upon contact with the tissue surface 14. The second material is selected to provide the middle portion 92 and/or end portion 90 with sufficient flexibility to translate through the channel 82 despite its curvature. Advantageously, the end portion 90 and middle portion 92 are captured within the channel 82 to prevent separation of the probe 80 from the shaft 20 and to prevent interference with the movement of the probe 80.
The end portion 90 of the probe 80 is configured to communicate the displacement of the tip portion 88 to the indicator 50. More specifically, the end portion 90 may include a plunger element 96 configured to slide within the upper portion 84 of the channel 82. Although 
  
The shaft 114 further includes a second channel 122 that extends through a flange portion 124 in a generally horizontal direction. The second channel 122 may be visible through an upper surface 126, much like the upper portions 64 (
  
The probes 150 may be any type of sensor configured to generate a signal corresponding to displacement. For example, each probe 150 may comprise a linear variable differential transformer (LVDT) that converts linear motion into corresponding electrical signals. Alternatively, each probe 150 may include a strain gauge or similar sensor that varies a property associated with an electrical signal (e.g., resistance) in proportion to the deformation and/or load experienced by the probe 150. In still other embodiments, a series of magnets (not shown) may be associated with each probe 150. The magnets generate a series of pulses when the probes 150 are displaced, and these pulses are associated with the corresponding displacements by a linear encoder.
Wires 164 coupled to the probes 150 communicate the electrical signals to a signal processor 166, which is schematically shown in 
The signal processor 166 in 
Referring back to 
In other embodiments, a moveable marking element is not required to communicate the displacements of the probes 150 to a practitioner. For example, 
Although several representative embodiments are described above, those skilled in the art will appreciate that the displacement of the probes 40 (
With reference to 
The method begins by first positioning the instrument 204 proximate the patient's body. If the tissue surface 202 is subcutaneous, an incision (not shown) is made in the patient's skin to gain access to the defect site 200. The incision may be relatively small if the method is performed arthroscopically, or larger if the method is performed using mini-arthrotomy or open surgical techniques. An obturator (not shown) may be placed within the central bore 28 (
  
More specifically, when the first end 206 of the shaft 20 contacts the tissue surface 202, one or more of the probes 40 will also contact the tissue surface 202 and be displaced into the associated channel 42 (
As shown in 
Increasing the number of probes 40 spaced about the shaft 20 enables the practitioner to take into account a greater number of planes when making adjustments. In general, the greater number of planes (and, hence, probes 40) in which displacement is compared, the more effectively the surface profile of the tissue surface 202 is taken into account. Additionally, increasing the number of probes 40 produces a more reliable (i.e., repeatable) indication of perpendicularity. For example, when the surface profile of the tissue surface 202 is more effectively taken into account, the shaft 20 is more likely to have the same orientation when moved to the desired axis 212 (using the procedure described above) regardless of any rotation about the desired axis 212. When only discreet or localized information about the tissue surface 202 is provided, reliable/repeatable indications are more difficult to obtain.
After making adjustments to properly orient the instrument 204, the practitioner maintains the shaft 20 at substantially the desired angle relative to the tissue surface 202. This may be accomplished manually by hand while monitoring the indicators 50 as necessary. An external support or fixation system (not shown) may also be provided to secure the instrument in the desired position once it is determined (e.g., similar to stereotactic procedures). As shown in 
The defect preparation tool 230 is configured to prepare the defect site 200 to a desired size, shape, and/or depth for receiving the implant 240. For example, the defect preparation tool 230 may form a cavity 232 having a size and shape generally corresponding to the implant 240. After preparing the defect site 200, the defect preparation tool 230 may be removed from the central bore 28. The central bore 28 may then serve as a conduit for the removal of any debris. Additionally, as shown in 
Again, throughout the procedure, the shaft 20 may be maintained at a desired angle relative to the tissue surface 202 by monitoring the displacement information displayed by the indicators 50. The implant 240 is advantageously delivered along the same axis along which the defect preparation tool 230 was aligned when forming the cavity 232. Such a procedure facilitates delivering the implant 240 so that the implant 240 may be fully seated within the cavity 232.
As shown in 
As a variation of the method described above, the instrument 204 or an additional harvesting instrument (not shown) that operates upon the same principles may be used to locate a similarly-shaped tissue surface after “mapping” the curvature of the tissue surface 202 and preparing the defect site 200. For example, after the instrument 204 is aligned with the desired axis 212, the displacement information is recorded, stored, committed to memory, or otherwise retained by the practitioner. The practitioner then attempts to match this displacement information when using the instrument 204 or harvesting instrument to select a remote tissue surface from which to harvest the implant 240. The remote tissue surface may be on the patient or a donor. Once a similarly-shaped remote tissue surface is located, the instrument 204 or harvesting instrument is used to cut or extract the implant 240 from the remote tissue surface. To this end, the instrument 204 or harvesting instrument may include a blade associated with its shaft 20. Alternatively, a separate cutting device or similar tool for extracting the implant 240 from the remote tissue surface may be inserted through the central bore 28.
The implant 240 is eventually delivered to the cavity 232 at the defect site 200 in the manner described above. Because the implant 240 was harvested from a remote tissue surface having the same or similar profile as the tissue surface 202, the top surface 242 of the implant 240 is more likely to approximate the natural curvature of the tissue surface 202.
While several embodiments are described above in considerable detail, the inventors do not intend to restrict or in any way limit the scope of the appended claims to such detail. Additional advantages and modifications will readily appear to those skilled in the art. For example, although the probes 40 described above move within the channels 42 formed in the shaft 20, the probes 40 may alternatively be located within tubes (not shown) provided on the exterior or interior of the shaft 20. Furthermore, those skilled in the art will appreciate that two or more of the components discussed above may be provided as part of assembly. For example, the assembly may include both the instrument 10 and the defect preparation tool 230. Alternatively or additionally, the assembly may include both the instrument 10 and the implant 240. The defect preparation tool 230 and/or implant 240 may be designed to effectively cooperate with the central bore 28 of the shaft 20 when provided as part of an assembly.
The invention in its broader aspects is thus not limited to the specific details, representative apparatus and methods, and illustrative examples shown and described. Accordingly, departures may be made from such details without departing from the scope or spirit of the general inventive concept.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind | 
|---|---|---|---|
| 493730 | MacKenzie | Mar 1893 | A | 
| 1405720 | Scott | Feb 1922 | A | 
| 1567910 | Franz et al. | Dec 1925 | A | 
| 1703154 | Lanzkron | Feb 1929 | A | 
| 1842573 | Treek | Jan 1932 | A | 
| 1984839 | Murray | Dec 1934 | A | 
| 2573462 | Lindsey | Oct 1951 | A | 
| 3564947 | Maier | Feb 1971 | A | 
| 3564948 | Pomernacki | Feb 1971 | A | 
| 3848601 | Ma | Nov 1974 | A | 
| 3971273 | Peters et al. | Jul 1976 | A | 
| 4010737 | Vilaghy et al. | Mar 1977 | A | 
| 4250892 | Dolhay et al. | Feb 1981 | A | 
| 4589206 | Marcoux | May 1986 | A | 
| 4706659 | Matthews et al. | Nov 1987 | A | 
| 5067964 | Richmond et al. | Nov 1991 | A | 
| 5115704 | Hyman | May 1992 | A | 
| 5139520 | Rosenberg | Aug 1992 | A | 
| 5152791 | Hakamatsuka et al. | Oct 1992 | A | 
| 5184926 | Hemmings | Feb 1993 | A | 
| 5197833 | Mayer et al. | Mar 1993 | A | 
| 5207681 | Ghadjar et al. | May 1993 | A | 
| 5328722 | Ghanayem et al. | Jul 1994 | A | 
| 5341816 | Allen | Aug 1994 | A | 
| 5345927 | Bonutti | Sep 1994 | A | 
| 5362166 | Yamamoto et al. | Nov 1994 | A | 
| 5368051 | Dunn et al. | Nov 1994 | A | 
| 5370692 | Fink et al. | Dec 1994 | A | 
| 5423823 | Schmieding | Jun 1995 | A | 
| 5425490 | Goble et al. | Jun 1995 | A | 
| 5443468 | Johnson | Aug 1995 | A | 
| 5575798 | Koutrouvelis | Nov 1996 | A | 
| 5587912 | Andersson et al. | Dec 1996 | A | 
| 5591234 | Kirsch | Jan 1997 | A | 
| 5632745 | Schwartz | May 1997 | A | 
| 5632747 | Scarborough et al. | May 1997 | A | 
| 5718707 | Mikhail | Feb 1998 | A | 
| 5771310 | Vannah | Jun 1998 | A | 
| 5782835 | Hart et al. | Jul 1998 | A | 
| 5788713 | Dubach et al. | Aug 1998 | A | 
| 5810887 | Accorti et al. | Sep 1998 | A | 
| 5860946 | Hofstatter | Jan 1999 | A | 
| 5876452 | Athanasiou et al. | Mar 1999 | A | 
| 5885293 | McDevitt | Mar 1999 | A | 
| 5899860 | Pfeiffer et al. | May 1999 | A | 
| 5904717 | Brekke et al. | May 1999 | A | 
| 5919196 | Bobic et al. | Jul 1999 | A | 
| 5921987 | Stone | Jul 1999 | A | 
| 6074394 | Krause | Jun 2000 | A | 
| 6110178 | Zech et al. | Aug 2000 | A | 
| 6146385 | Torrie et al. | Nov 2000 | A | 
| 6231608 | Stone | May 2001 | B1 | 
| 6242247 | Rieser et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 | 
| 6251143 | Schwartz et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 | 
| 6270503 | Schmieding | Aug 2001 | B1 | 
| 6306142 | Johanson et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 | 
| 6358253 | Torrie et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 | 
| 6375658 | Hangody et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 | 
| 6395011 | Johanson et al. | May 2002 | B1 | 
| 6459948 | Ateshian et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 | 
| 6488033 | Cerundolo | Dec 2002 | B1 | 
| 6511511 | Slivka et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 | 
| 6520964 | Tallarida et al. | Feb 2003 | B2 | 
| 6530928 | Frei et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 | 
| 6582438 | DeMayo | Jun 2003 | B2 | 
| 6591581 | Schmieding | Jul 2003 | B2 | 
| 6592588 | Bobic et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 | 
| 6610067 | Tallarida et al. | Aug 2003 | B2 | 
| 6656195 | Peters et al. | Dec 2003 | B2 | 
| 6679917 | Ek | Jan 2004 | B2 | 
| 6767354 | Johanson et al. | Jul 2004 | B2 | 
| 6793429 | Arrison | Sep 2004 | B2 | 
| 6852114 | Cerundolo | Feb 2005 | B2 | 
| 6858042 | Nadler et al. | Feb 2005 | B2 | 
| 6988015 | Schopf et al. | Jan 2006 | B1 | 
| 6998418 | Sung et al. | Feb 2006 | B1 | 
| 7029479 | Tallarida et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 | 
| 7048477 | Abrams | May 2006 | B2 | 
| 7160305 | Schmieding | Jan 2007 | B2 | 
| 7264634 | Schmieding | Sep 2007 | B2 | 
| 7371260 | Malinin | May 2008 | B2 | 
| 7416371 | Scott et al. | Aug 2008 | B2 | 
| 7548865 | Schmieding | Jun 2009 | B2 | 
| 7550007 | Malinin | Jun 2009 | B2 | 
| 7563266 | Camino et al. | Jul 2009 | B2 | 
| 7572291 | Gil et al. | Aug 2009 | B2 | 
| 7591820 | Schmieding et al. | Sep 2009 | B2 | 
| 7608098 | Stone et al. | Oct 2009 | B1 | 
| 7666230 | Orban et al. | Feb 2010 | B2 | 
| 7758583 | Gil et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 | 
| 7758643 | Stone et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 | 
| 7776043 | Nycz et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 | 
| 7833269 | Nycz et al. | Nov 2010 | B2 | 
| 7862567 | Schmieding | Jan 2011 | B2 | 
| 7875032 | Lyons | Jan 2011 | B2 | 
| 7879040 | Bharadwaj | Feb 2011 | B2 | 
| 7887546 | Gil | Feb 2011 | B2 | 
| 7905904 | Stone et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 | 
| 7909851 | Stone et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 | 
| 7909873 | Tan-Malecki et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 | 
| 7914539 | Stone et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 | 
| 7955335 | Gil et al. | Jun 2011 | B2 | 
| 7955336 | Gil et al. | Jun 2011 | B2 | 
| 7985230 | Gil et al. | Jul 2011 | B2 | 
| 7997174 | Gil et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 | 
| 8034090 | Stone et al. | Oct 2011 | B2 | 
| 8048079 | Iannarone | Nov 2011 | B2 | 
| RE43714 | Nadler et al. | Oct 2012 | E | 
| 8435305 | Lozier et al. | May 2013 | B2 | 
| 20030167062 | Gambale et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 | 
| 20030171810 | Steiner | Sep 2003 | A1 | 
| 20040039400 | Schmieding et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 | 
| 20040193154 | Leatherbury et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 | 
| 20040230194 | Urbanski et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 | 
| 20040230303 | Gomes et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 | 
| 20050013872 | Freyman | Jan 2005 | A1 | 
| 20050021044 | Stone et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 | 
| 20050038520 | Bienette et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 | 
| 20050080435 | Smith et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 | 
| 20050137600 | Jacobs et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 | 
| 20060131906 | Maurer et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 | 
| 20060247790 | McKay | Nov 2006 | A1 | 
| 20070043376 | Leatherbury et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 | 
| 20070135917 | Malinin | Jun 2007 | A1 | 
| 20070135918 | Malinin | Jun 2007 | A1 | 
| 20070149982 | Lyons | Jun 2007 | A1 | 
| 20070270711 | Gil et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 | 
| 20070299517 | Davisson et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 | 
| 20080019115 | Park et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 | 
| 20080027447 | Gil et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 | 
| 20080051812 | Schmitz et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 | 
| 20080167653 | Watlington et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 | 
| 20080195115 | Oren et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 | 
| 20080200915 | Globerman et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 | 
| 20080243028 | Howard et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 | 
| 20080243029 | Howard et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 | 
| 20080255427 | Satake et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 | 
| 20080262616 | McKay | Oct 2008 | A1 | 
| 20080269566 | Measamer | Oct 2008 | A1 | 
| 20080306608 | Nycz et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 | 
| 20090024224 | Chen et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 | 
| 20090047085 | Liao et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 | 
| 20090054906 | Walthall et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 | 
| 20090076556 | Mcgarity et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 | 
| 20090171359 | Sterrett | Jul 2009 | A1 | 
| 20090209962 | Jamali | Aug 2009 | A1 | 
| 20090275950 | Sterrett et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 | 
| 20090281550 | Keller | Nov 2009 | A1 | 
| 20090299371 | Steiner et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 | 
| 20090299372 | Steiner et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 | 
| 20090319051 | Nycz et al. | Dec 2009 | A9 | 
| 20100123325 | Maffeis | May 2010 | A1 | 
| 20100168750 | Sherman | Jul 2010 | A1 | 
| 20100249786 | Schmieding et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 | 
| 20100292704 | Stoffel et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 | 
| 20110009872 | Mistry et al. | Jan 2011 | A1 | 
| 20110046628 | Jamali | Feb 2011 | A1 | 
| 20110054408 | Wei et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 | 
| 20110137315 | Gil et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 | 
| 20110144648 | Gil et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 | 
| 20110208193 | Gil et al. | Aug 2011 | A1 | 
| 20120053588 | Lozier et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 | 
| 20120053642 | Lozier et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 | 
| 20120150030 | Reach et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 | 
| 20130231745 | Lozier et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 | 
| Number | Date | Country | 
|---|---|---|
| 4922296 | Sep 1996 | AU | 
| 2411618 | Apr 1975 | DE | 
| 2830566 | Jan 1980 | DE | 
| 2830566 | Jan 1980 | DE | 
| 2933174 | Apr 1980 | DE | 
| 4317448 | Nov 1994 | DE | 
| 19503504 | Mar 1996 | DE | 
| 19503504 | Mar 1996 | DE | 
| 0307241 | Mar 1989 | EP | 
| 0493698 | Jul 1992 | EP | 
| 0508710 | Oct 1992 | EP | 
| 0768332 | Apr 1997 | EP | 
| 0815809 | Jan 1998 | EP | 
| 0824893 | Feb 1998 | EP | 
| 2700462 | Jul 1994 | FR | 
| 2175506 | Dec 1986 | GB | 
| 3178652 | Feb 1991 | JP | 
| 4303450 | Oct 1992 | JP | 
| 9122226 | May 1997 | JP | 
| 10251492 | Sep 1998 | JP | 
| 10513386 | Dec 1998 | JP | 
| WO-9315694 | Aug 1993 | WO | 
| WO-9426211 | Nov 1994 | WO | 
| WO-9624302 | Aug 1996 | WO | 
| WO-9624310 | Aug 1996 | WO | 
| WO 9627333 | Sep 1996 | WO | 
| WO-9627333 | Sep 1996 | WO | 
| WO-9725942 | Jul 1997 | WO | 
| WO-9746665 | Dec 1997 | WO | 
| WO9834569 | Aug 1998 | WO | 
| WO-9834596 | Aug 1998 | WO | 
| WO-9840027 | Sep 1998 | WO | 
| WO-9856317 | Dec 1998 | WO | 
| WO9921497 | May 1999 | WO | 
| WO-0143667 | Jun 2001 | WO | 
| WO-0224244 | Mar 2002 | WO | 
| WO-2005023321 | Mar 2005 | WO | 
| WO-2005094694 | Oct 2005 | WO | 
| WO-2006026325 | Mar 2006 | WO | 
| WO-2008147692 | Dec 2008 | WO | 
| WO-2010092100 | Aug 2010 | WO | 
| WO-2011008968 | Jan 2011 | WO | 
| Entry | 
|---|
| Barber et al. (2006), “Osteochondral Repair System,” www.obi.com, pp. 1-17. | 
| Burba et al. (1992), “An arthroscopic biopsy procedure for obtaining osteochondral samples from the equine midcarpal joint,” Journal of Investigative Surgery, vol. 5, pp. 343-359. | 
| Convery, et al. (1991), “Fresh osteochondral allografting of the femoral condyle,” Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, No. 273, pp. 139-145. | 
| Gross (1992), “Use of fresh osteochondral allografts to replace traumatic joint defects,” Allografts in Orthopaedic Practice, Ch. 5, pp. 67-82. | 
| McDermott, et al. (1985), “Fresh small fragment osteochondral allografts,” Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, No. 197, pp. 96-102. | 
| Meyers, et al. (1989), “Resurfacing of the knee with fresh osteochondral allograft,” The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, vol. 1A, No. 5, pp. 704-713. | 
| Schachar et al. (1999), “Transplantation of cryopreserved osteochondral dowel allografts of focal articular defects in Ovine model,” J. Orthop. Res., vol. 17, No. 6, pp. 909-919. | 
| PCT International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Jun. 12, 2009, issued for PCT Application No. PCT/US2009/036661, filed Mar. 10, 2009. | 
| Garrett, “Osteochondral Allografts for Reconstruction of Articular Defects of the Knee,” AAOS Instructional Course Lectures, 1998, vol. 47, pp. 517-522. | 
| Garrett, “Osteochondral Allografts,” Ch. 34, pp. 355-358. | 
| Hurtig et al., Vet. Surgery, “Osteochondral Dowel Transplantation for Repair of Focal Defects in the Knee: an Outcome Study Using an Ovine Model,” 1998, vol. 27, pp. 5-16. | 
| Macro Sensors, LVDT Basics, Technical Bulletin 0103 dated Jan. 31, 2003 (4 pages). | 
| J.L. Ronsky et al., Precise Measurement of Cat Patellofemoral Joint Surface Geometry with Multistation Digital Photogrammetry, Journal of Biomechanical Engineering, vol. 121, pp. 196-205 (Apr. 1999). | 
| Ian C. Clarke, Quantitative measurement of human articular surface topography in vitro by profile recorder and stereomicroscopy techniques, Journal of Microscopy, vol. 97, Pt. 3, Apr. 1973, pp. 309-314. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 10/149,853, Non Final Office Action mailed Apr. 13, 2004”, 7 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 10/149,853, Notice of Allowance mailed Oct. 5, 2004”, 7 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 10/149,853, Preliminary Amendment mailed Oct. 17, 2002”, 6 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 10/149,853, Response filed Jul. 6, 2004 to Non Final Office Action mailed Apr. 13, 2004”, 9 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 11/705,575, Non Final Office Action mailed Mar. 15, 2005”, 8 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 11/705,575, Non Final Office Action mailed Sep. 15, 2011”, 7 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 11/705,575, Notice of Non-Compliant Amendment mailed Jan. 7, 2011”, 3 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 11/705,575, Notice of Non-Compliant Amendment mailed Oct. 29, 2010”, 3 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 11/705,575, Preliminary Amendment filed Feb. 12, 2007”, 14 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 11/705,575, Response filed Feb. 7, 2011 to Notice of Non-Compliant Amendment mailed Jan. 7, 2011”, 22 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 11/705,575, Response filed Sep. 15, 2010 to Non Final Office Action mailed Mar. 16, 2010”, 13 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 11/705,575, Response filed Nov. 29, 2010 to Notice of Non-Compliant Amendment mailed Oct. 29, 2010”, 14 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 11/705,575, Revised Preliminary Amendment filed Sep. 15, 2010 in Response to Office Action mailed Mar. 16, 2010”, 11 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 11/753,102, Advisory Action filed Dec. 10, 2010”, 3 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 11/753,102, Final Office Action mailed Aug. 3, 2010”, 14 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 11/753,102, Non Final Office Action mailed Jan. 4, 2010”, 13 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 11/753,102, Response filed May 4, 2010 to Non Final Office Action mailed Jan. 4, 2010”, 13 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 11/753,102, Response filed Nov. 23, 2009 to Restriction Requirement mailed Oct. 30, 2009”, 12 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 11/753,102, Response filed Dec. 3, 2010 to Final Office Action mailed Aug. 3, 2010”, 15 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 11/753,102, Restriction Requirement mailed Oct. 30, 2009”, 9 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 11/759,679, Final Office Action mailed Oct. 7, 2010”, 17 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 11/759,679, Non Final Office Action mailed Feb. 26, 2010”, 14 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 11/759,679, Response filed Jun. 28, 2009 to Non Final Office Action mailed Feb. 26, 2010”, 13 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 11/759,679, Response filed Oct. 30, 2009 to Restriction Requirement mailed Sep. 4, 2009”, 3 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 11/759,679, Restriction Requirement mailed Sep. 4, 2009”, 6 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 12/196,831, Advisory Action mailed Jan. 21, 2011”, 3 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 12/196,831, Final Office Action mailed Nov. 12, 2010”, 9 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 12/196,831, Non Final Office Action mailed Jul. 9, 2010”, 7 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 12/196,831, Non Final Office Action mailed Oct. 6, 2011”, 8 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 12/196,831, Response filed Jan. 10, 2011 to Final Office Action mailed Nov. 12, 2010”, 10 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 12/196,831, Response filed Jun. 21, 2010 to Restriction Requirement mailed Jun. 8, 2010”, 8 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 12/196,831, Response filed Oct. 7, 2010 to Non Final Office Action mailed Jul. 9, 2010”, 11 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 12/196,831, Restriction Requirement mailed Jun. 8, 2010”, 7 pgs. | 
| “International Application Serial No. PCT/US2008/063582, International Search Report mailed Oct. 9, 2008”, 3 pgs. | 
| “International Application Serial No. PCT/US2008/063582, Written Opinion mailed Oct. 9, 2008”, 7 pgs. | 
| “International Application Serial No. PCT/US2008/064653, International Search Report mailed Sep. 7, 2009”, 3 pgs. | 
| “International Application Serial No. PCT/US2008/064653, Written Opinion mailed Sep. 7, 2009”, 8 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 11/705,575, Notice of Allowance mailed May 15, 2012”, 5 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 12/196,831, Advisory Action mailed Jul. 5, 2012”, 3 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 12/196,831, Response filed Jun. 12, 2012 to Final Office Action mailed Apr. 12, 2012”, 14 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 12/873,030, Restriction Requirement mailed Jul. 10, 2012”, 6 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 12/873,049, Restriction Requirement mailed Jul. 10, 2012”, 5 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 12/873,030, Non Final Office Action mailed Oct. 30, 2012”, 17 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 12/873,030, Response filed Feb. 28, 2013 to Non Final Office Action mailed Oct. 30, 2012”, 14 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 12/873,049, Notice of Allowance mailed Nov. 14, 2012”, 13 pgs. | 
| “Australian Application Serial No. 200116857, Office Action mailed Feb. 13, 2004”, 2 pgs. | 
| “Canadian Application Serial No. 00979315.9, Office Action mailed Jan. 24, 2007”, 3 pgs. | 
| “Canadian Application Serial No. 00979315.9, Response filed Jul. 23, 2007 to Office Action mailed Jan. 24, 2007”, 14 pgs. | 
| “European Application Serial No. 04020622.9, European Search Report mailed Nov. 29, 2004”, 6 pgs. | 
| “European Application Serial No. 04020622.9, Office Action mailed Oct. 20, 2005”, 3 pgs. | 
| “European Application Serial No. 04020622.9, Response filed Apr. 13, 2006 to Office Action mailed Oct. 20, 2005”, 12 pgs. | 
| “International Application Serial No. PCT/CH00/00659, International Preliminary Examination Report mailed Mar. 20, 2002”, 15 pgs. | 
| “International Application Serial No. PCT/CH00/00659, International Search Report mailed Jan. 2, 2001”, 8 pgs. | 
| “International Application Serial No. PCT/US2008/063582, International Preliminary Report on Patentability mailed Nov. 24, 2009”, 8 pgs. | 
| “International Application Serial No. PCT/US2009/036661, International Preliminary Report on Patentability mailed Sep. 14, 2010”, 9 pgs. | 
| “Japanese Application Serial No. 2000-544609, Office Action mailed Jan. 5, 2010”, 9 pgs. | 
| “Japanese Application Serial No. 2000-544609, Office Action mailed Mar. 24, 2009”, 8 pgs. | 
| “Japanese Application Serial No. 2000-544609, Office Action mailed Aug. 5, 2008”, 5 pgs. | 
| “Japanese Application Serial No. 2000-544609, Office Action mailed Nov. 2, 2010”, 7 pgs. | 
| “Japanese Application Serial No. 2000-544609, Response filed Apr. 27, 2010 to Office Action mailed Jan. 24, 2010”, 8 pgs. | 
| “Japanese Application Serial No. 2000-544609, Response filed Jun. 11, 2009 to Office Action mailed Mar. 24, 2009”, 14 pgs. | 
| “Japanese Application Serial No. 2000-544609, Response filed Oct. 28, 2008 to Office Action mailed Aug. 5, 2008”, 14 pgs. | 
| Albee, Fred H, “Bone Surgery With Machine Tools”, Scientific American vol. 154.4, (Apr. 1936), 178-181. | 
| U.S. Appl. No. 13/855,157, filed Apr. 2, 2013, Osteochondral Graft Delivery Device and Uses Thereof. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 10/149,853, Preliminary Amendment filed Sep. 14, 2012”, 7 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 11/753,102, Non Final Office Action mailed Feb. 26, 2014”, 9 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 12/196,831, Examiner Interview Summary mailed Nov. 25, 2013”, 3 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 12/196,831, Final Office Action mailed Jan. 30, 2014”, 19 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 12/196,831, Non Final Office Action mailed Oct. 3, 2013”, 21 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 12/196,831, Response filed Nov. 27, 2013 to Non-Final Office Action dated Oct. 3, 2013”, 13 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 12/873,030, Advisory Action mailed Oct. 16, 2013”, 3 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 12/873,030, Final Office Action mailed Aug. 1, 2013”, 14 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 12/873,030, Non Final Office Action mailed Nov. 6, 2013”, 11 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 12/873,030, Response filed Oct. 1, 2013 to Final Office Action mailed Aug. 1, 2013”, 15 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 12/873,049, Notice of Allowance mailed Mar. 25, 2013”, 9 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 13/619,022, Non Final Office Action mailed May 8, 2013”, 6 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 13/855,157, Non Final Office Action mailed Oct. 10, 2013”, 15 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 13/855,157, Notice of Allowance mailed Feb. 11, 2014”, 10 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 13/855,157, Preliminary Amendment filed Apr. 5, 2013”, 7 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 13/855,157, Response filed Jan. 10, 2014 to Non-Final Office Action dated Oct. 10, 2013”, 8 pgs. | 
| “International Application Serial No. PCT/US2008/064653, International Preliminary Report on Patentability mailed”, 9 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 11/705,575, Response filed Dec. 15, 2011 to Non Final Office Action mailed Sep. 15, 2011”, 14 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 12/196,831, Examiner Interview Summary mailed Feb. 6, 2012”, 18 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 12/196,831, Final Office Action mailed Apr. 12, 2012”, 17 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 12/196,831, Response filed Feb. 1, 2012 to Non Final Office Action mailed Oct. 6, 2011”, 15 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 12/196,831, Response filed Sep. 12, 2012 to Advisory Action mailed Jul. 5, 2012”, 16 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 12/873,030, Response filed Jul. 27, 2012 to Restriction Requirement mailed Jul. 10, 2012”, 7 pgs. | 
| “U.S. Appl. No. 12/873,049, Response filed Jul. 27, 2012 to Restriction Requirement mailed Jul. 10, 2012”, 8 pgs. | 
| “International Application Serial No. PCT/US2009/036661, International Search Report mailed Jun. 12, 2009”, 4 pgs. | 
| “International Application Serial No. PCT/US2009/036661, Written Opinion mailed Jun. 12, 2009”, 8 pgs. | 
| Bobic, V, “Arthroscopic osteochondral autograft transplantation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a preliminary clinical study”, Knee Surg, Sport Traumatol, Arthroscopy 3, (1996), 262-264. | 
| Convery, F.R., et al., “The Repair of Large Osteochondral Defects”, An Experimental Study in Horses, Clin. Orthrop. 82., (1972), 253-262. | 
| Ehalt, W, “Bisherige Erfahrungen mit dem plastischen Ersatz von Gelenkknorpel aus der Knochenbank”, Verh. Dtsch. Orthop. Ges. 43, (1955), 107-109. | 
| Ehalt, W., et al., “Gelenkknorpel-Plastik”, Langenbecks Arch. Kiln. Chir. 299, (1962), 768-774. | 
| Ehalt, Walther M, “Grafting of joint-cartilage Bone-Blocks from the bank”, VI. Congr. Soc. Internat. Chir. Orthop. Traumatol. S., (1954), 419-421. | 
| Garrett, John C, “Treatment of Osteochondral Defects of the Distal Femur with Fresh Osteochondral Allografts: A Preliminary Report”, Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery 2(4), (1986), 222-226. | 
| Guhl, James F, “Chapter 21: The Impact of Arthroscopy on Osteochondritis Dissecans”, Operative Arthroscopy, (1991), 297-317. | 
| Hangody, L, et al., “Autogenous osteochondral grafting in the knees of German Shepherd dogs: Radiographic and histological analysis”, Hungarian Review of Sports Medicine 35, (1994), 117-123. | 
| Hangody, L, et al., “Treatment of localized chondral and osteochondral defects in the knee by a new autogenous osteochondral grafting tenique”, Hungarian Review of Sports Medicine 35, (1994), 241-246. | 
| Hangody, Laszlo, “Arthroscopic autogeous osteochondral mosaicplasty for the treatment of femoral condylar articular defects: A preliminary report”, Knee Surg, Sports Traumatol, Arthrosc 5, (1997), 262-267. | 
| Hangody, Laszlo, et al., “Artoszkopos autolog osteochondralis mozaikplastica (Arthroscopic autogenous osteochondral mosaicplasty)”, Hungarian Journal of Traumatology and Orthopaedics 39, (1996), 49-54. | 
| Hangody, Laszlo, “Autologous osteochondral mosaic-like graft technique for replacing weight bearing cartilage defects”, 7th Congres of ESSTKSA, Abstract Only, (1996), 3 pgs. | 
| Hangody, Laszlo, et al., “Autologous Osteochondral Mosaic-Plasty”, Review of Osteology 3, (1996), 70-73. | 
| Hangody, Laszlo, “Chapter 13: Autogenous Osteochondral Mosaicplasty for the Treatment of Focal Chondral and Osteochondral Defects of the Femoral Condyles”, Knieinstabilitat und Knorpelschaden, (1998), 97-106. | 
| Hangody, Laszlo, “Mosaic-plasty in Clinical Practice”, Review of Osteology 4, (1996), 32-36. | 
| Hangody, Laszlo, et al., “Mosaicplasty for the Treatment of Articular Cartilage Defects: Application in Clinical Practice”, Orthopedics 21(2), (1998), 751-756. | 
| Hangody, Laszlo, et al., “Mosaicplasty for the treatment of osteochondritis dissecans of the knee”, [Online]. Retrieved from the Internet: <URL: http://www.egydoc.com/Sites/Arthroclub/AC—Files/Articles/article39.pdf>, (Accessed Nov. 8, 2005), 9 pgs. | 
| Hangody, Laszlo, et al., “New Method in Treatment of Sever Local Cartilage Damage in the Knee Joint (Eine neue Methode in der Behandlung von schweren, lokalen Knorpelschaden im Kniegelenk”, Osteosynthese International 5, (1997), 316-321. | 
| Hangody, Laszlo, et al., “Osteochondral Plugs: Autogenous Osteochondral Mosaicplasty for the Treatment of Focal Chondral and Osteochondral Articular Defects”, Operative Techniques in Orthopaedics 7(4), (1997), 312-322. | 
| Hangody, Laszlo, et al., “Sülyos, körülírt térdízületi porckárosodás sebészi kezelésének új lehetosége (New alternative in the treatment of sever, localized cartilage damages in the knee joint)”, Hungarian Journal of Traumatology and Orthopaedics 37, (1994), 237-242. | 
| Hangody, Laszlo, et al., “Treatment of Osteochondritis Dissecans of the Talus: Use of Mosaicplasty Technique—A Preliminary Report”, Foot and Ankle International 18(10), (1997), 628-634. | 
| Lindholm, Sam, et al., “Reconstruction of the Articular Surface by Transfixation of an Osteochondral Fragment of the Femoral Condyle Using a Bone Transplant”, Scandinavian Journal of Rheumatology Supplement 44, (1982), 5-13. | 
| Muller, W, “Osteochondrosis Dissecans”, Progress in Orthopaedic Surgery vol. 3, (1978), 135-142. | 
| Woods, T, “Effectiveness of three extraction techniques in the development of a decellularized bone-anterior cruciate ligament-bone graft”, Biomaterials, Elsevier Science Publishers BV., Barking, GB, vol. 26, No. 35, (Dec. 1, 2005), 7339-7349. | 
| Yamashita, et al., “The Transplantation of an Autogeneic Osteochondral Fragment for Osteochondritis Dissecans of the Knee”, Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, No. 201, (1985), 43-50. | 
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20090228031 A1 | Sep 2009 | US |