Interspinous process implant and method of implantation

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 8771317
  • Patent Number
    8,771,317
  • Date Filed
    Wednesday, October 28, 2009
    15 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, July 8, 2014
    10 years ago
Abstract
Medical devices for the treatment of spinal conditions are described herein. The medical device of this invention includes a spacer that is disposed between adjacent spinous processes and has a proximal retention member and a distal retention member, which may be rotated with respect to the proximal retention member between an initial implantation configuration and a final locked configuration.
Description
BACKGROUND

This invention relates generally to the treatment of spinal conditions, and more particularly, to the treatment of spinal stenosis using devices for implantation between adjacent spinous processes.


The clinical syndrome of neurogenic intermittent claudication due to lumbar spinal stenosis is a frequent source of pain in the lower back and extremities, leading to impaired walking, and causing other forms of disability in the elderly. Although the incidence and prevalence of symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis have not been established, this condition is the most frequent indication of spinal surgery in patients older than 65 years of age.


Lumbar spinal stenosis is a condition of the spine characterized by a narrowing of the lumbar spinal canal. With spinal stenosis, the spinal canal narrows and pinches the spinal cord and nerves, causing pain in the back and legs. It is estimated that approximately 5 in 10,000 people develop lumbar spinal stenosis each year. For patients who seek the aid of a physician for back pain, approximately 12%-15% are diagnosed as having lumbar spinal stenosis.


Common treatments for lumbar spinal stenosis include physical therapy (including changes in posture), medication, and occasionally surgery. Changes in posture and physical therapy may be effective in flexing the spine to decompress and enlarge the space available to the spinal cord and nerves—thus relieving pressure on pinched nerves. Medications such as NSAIDS and other anti-inflammatory medications are often used to alleviate pain, although they are not typically effective at addressing spinal compression, which is the cause of the pain.


Surgical treatments are more aggressive than medication or physical therapy, and in appropriate cases surgery may be the best way to achieve lessening of the symptoms of lumbar spinal stenosis. The principal goal of surgery is to decompress the central spinal canal and the neural foramina, creating more space and eliminating pressure on the spinal nerve roots. The most common surgery for treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis is direct decompression via a laminectomy and partial facetectomy. In this procedure, the patient is given a general anesthesia as an incision is made in the patient to access the spine. The lamina of one or more vertebrae is removed to create more space for the nerves. The intervertebral disc may also be removed, and the adjacent vertebrae may be fused to strengthen the unstable segments. The success rate of decompressive laminectomy has been reported to be in excess of 65%. A significant reduction of the symptoms of lumbar spinal stenosis is also achieved in many of these cases.


Alternatively, the vertebrae can be distracted and an interspinous process device implanted between adjacent spinous processes of the vertebrae to maintain the desired separation between the vertebral segments. Such interspinous process devices typically work for their intended purposes, but some could be improved. For example, many currently available interspinous process devices are challenging to properly place between adjacent spinous processes because of the space limitations in that area, which is filled with various muscles, ligaments, bone and other tissue. Some devices require a posterior to anterior approach. These types of devices are undesirable because they require that both the interspinous ligament and the supraspinous ligament be cut, or otherwise manipulated to allow the physician to gain access to the space between adjacent interspinous processes. In any surgical procedure, it is desirable to minimize trauma to surrounding tissue as much as possible in order to minimize recovery time for the patient and to provide the patient with the greatest chance for a successful outcome.


In view of the challenges with interspinous process devices that require a posterior to anterior approach, some devices have been designed that allow for a lateral approach. Some of these devices are significant improvements over those devices that require a direct posterior to anterior approach. However, even some devices that allow for a lateral approach to the space between adjacent spinous processes have challenges. As noted above, the space between adjacent spinous processes is confined. Thus it is difficult for the surgeon to manipulate the device to ensure that it is properly located in the space and to ensure that the device remains properly positioned therein. Where additional manipulation of the device is necessary to ensure that the device remains properly positioned in the desired space, the spatial limitations would be a factor militating against ease of insertion.


Thus, a need exists for improvements in interspinous process devices.


SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The interspinous process device of this invention includes (i) a main body portion having a shaft that is adapted to be disposed between adjacent spinous processes and a distal retention member adapted to be disposed along a lateral side of a superior spinous process, and an inferior spinous process, and (ii) a proximal retention member adapted to be disposed along an opposite lateral side of the superior spinous process and the inferior spinous process. A damper ring may also be located around the shaft of the main body portion between the proximal and distal retention members for engagement with the superior and inferior spinous processes. The proximal retention member has a central portion that defines a central lumen into which a proximal portion of the shaft of the main body portion may be located. The proximal portion of the shaft and the central lumen are configured so that the proximal retention member is rotatable with respect to the main body portion. Preferably, the length of the major axis of the distal retention member is greater than the distance between adjacent spinous processes when they are distracted to the desired spacing. Preferably, the length of the minor axis of the distal retention member is about equal to the distance between the adjacent spinous processes when they are distracted to the desired spacing.


When the interspinous process device of this invention is in an implantation configuration, the proximal retention member is oriented such that its major axis extends in a direction that is substantially normal to the orientation of the major axis of the distal retention member. When the interspinous process device is in its locked and final configuration, the major axis of the proximal retention member extends in a direction that is substantially aligned with and parallel to the major axis of the distal retention member. The proximal portion of the shaft includes a portion of a locking mechanism that cooperates with a complementary portion formed within the central lumen of the proximal retention member. This locking mechanism ensures that when the major axes of the proximal retention member and the distal retention member extend in a direction that is aligned and parallel to each other, the proximal retention member is locked with respect to the main body portion. Thus, the device can remain fixed in place between adjacent spinous processes such that the shaft and damper ring are disposed between the adjacent spinous processes and are substantially perpendicular to, and cross through, the sagittal plane. In this position, the distal retention member is located along the distal side of the superior and inferior spinous processes and the proximal retention member is located along the proximal side of the superior and inferior spinous processes such that the major axes of the distal and proximal retention members extend in a direction that is generally parallel to the sagittal and coronal planes and generally normal to the axial plane.


With the interspinous process device of this invention in the implantation configuration described above, the distal retention member is inserted through the interspinous ligament, which has been dissected to create an opening therethrough. This allows passage of the distal retention member therethrough, and through the space between adjacent spinous processes with a lateral approach. The distal retention member is oriented such that the major axis of the distal retention member is generally parallel to the axial plane but oriented at an angle to the sagittal and coronal planes. In this orientation, the minor axis is generally parallel to the sagittal plane and coronal plane and generally normal to the axial plane. This ensures that the dimension of the distal retention member along its minor axis does not hinder movement of the interspinous process device of this invention into the space between adjacent spinous processes. The distal retention member thus may be passed through the space between adjacent spinous processes with minimal disruption to the surrounding tissue. Importantly, the supraspinous ligament remains undisturbed during the procedure. It may be necessary for a leading edge of the distal retention member to be first passed through the space between the adjacent interspinous processes, in order to properly position the device. Of course, the orientation of the distal retention member may have to be adjusted in order to be properly placed in position. For example, the distal retention member may have to be rotated around the (i) longitudinal axis of the device, (ii) its major axis, and/or (iii) its minor axis during some part, or all, of the implantation procedure.


Once the distal retention member is adjacent to the distal side of the adjacent spinous processes, the distal retention member may be rotated with respect to the proximal retention member. This locks the distal retention member with respect to the proximal retention member such that the major axis of the proximal retention member and the major axis of the distal retention member extend in a direction that is generally parallel to each other and the sagittal and coronal planes and is generally normal to the axial plane. As noted above, the major axes of the distal retention member and the proximal retention member define a dimension that is greater than the distance between adjacent spinous processes. Preferably the dimension of the proximal retention member along its major axis is greater than the dimension of the distal retention member along its major axis. Of course, the distance between the proximal retention member and the distal retention member should be slightly greater than the distance between the distal side of the adjacent spinous process and the proximal side of the adjacent spinous processes. In this manner, the interspinous process device of this invention is held in place by the proximal and distal retention members and the shaft and/or the damper ring prevents the space between the adjacent spinous processes from collapsing during extension of the spine.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS


FIG. 1 is an exploded perspective view of the interspinous process device of this invention viewed from the distal end of the device;



FIG. 2 is a partially exploded perspective view of the interspinous process device of this invention viewed from the proximal end of the device;



FIG. 3 is a proximal perspective view of the interspinous process device of this invention in the implantation configuration;



FIG. 4 is a distal perspective view of the interspinous process device of this invention in the locked configuration;



FIG. 5 is a proximal perspective view of the interspinous process device of this invention in the locked configuration;



FIG. 6 is a cross-sectional view of the interspinous process device of this invention taken along lines 6-6 of FIG. 3;



FIG. 7 is a cross-sectional view of the interspinous process device of this invention taken along lines 7-7 of FIG. 3;



FIG. 8 is a cross-sectional view of the interspinous process device of this invention taken along lines 8-8 of FIG. 5;



FIG. 9 is a cross-sectional view of the interspinous process device of this invention taken along lines 9-9 of FIG. 5;



FIG. 10 is an end elevation view of the proximal retention member of the interspinous process device of this invention;



FIG. 11 is a schematic view of a portion of a human spine showing a dissected interspinous ligament in the space between adjacent spinous processes where the interspinous process device of this invention is to be implanted; and



FIGS. 12-15 are schematic illustrations of the interspinous process device of this invention and a portion of a human spine that illustrate the method of implanting the interspinous process device of this invention.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION

As used in this specification and the appended claims, the singular forms “a,” “an” and “the” include plural referents unless the context clearly dictates otherwise. Thus, for example, the term “a member” is intended to mean a single member or a combination of members, and “a material” is intended to mean one or more materials, or a combination thereof. Furthermore, the words “proximal” and “distal” refer to directions closer to and away from, respectively, an operator (e.g., surgeon, physician, nurse, technician, etc.) who would insert the medical device into the patient, with the tip-end (i.e., distal end) of the device inserted inside a patient's body first. Thus, for example, the device end first inserted inside the patient's body would be the distal end of the device, while the device end last to enter the patient's body would be the proximal end of the device.


As used in this specification and the appended claims, the term “body” when used in connection with the location where the device of this invention is to be placed to treat lumbar spinal stenosis, or to teach or practice implantation methods for the device, means a mammalian body. For example, a body can be a patient's body, or a cadaver, or a portion of a patient's body or a portion of a cadaver.


As used in this specification and the appended claims, the term “parallel” describes a relationship, given normal manufacturing or measurement or similar tolerances, between two geometric constructions (e.g., two lines, two planes, a line and a plane, two curved surfaces, a line and a curved surface or the like) in which the two geometric constructions are substantially non-intersecting as they extend substantially to infinity. For example, as used herein, a line is said to be parallel to a curved surface when the line and the curved surface do not intersect as they extend to infinity. Similarly, when a planar surface (i.e., a two-dimensional surface) is said to be parallel to a line, every point along the line is spaced apart from the nearest portion of the surface by a substantially equal distance. Two geometric constructions are described herein as being “parallel” or “substantially parallel” to each other when they are nominally parallel to each other, such as for example, when they are parallel to each other within a tolerance. Such tolerances can include, for example, manufacturing tolerances, measurement tolerances or the like.


As used in this specification and the appended claims, the terms “normal”, perpendicular” and “orthogonal” describe a relationship between two geometric constructions (e.g., two lines, two planes, a line and a plane, two curved surfaces, a line and a curved surface or the like) in which the two geometric constructions intersect at an angle of approximately 90 degrees within at least one plane. For example, as used herein, a line is said to be normal, perpendicular or orthoganal to a curved surface when the line and the curved surface intersect at an angle of approximately 90 degrees within a plane. Two geometric constructions are described herein as being “normal”, “perpendicular”, “orthogonal” or “substantially normal”, “substantially perpendicular”, “substantially orthogonal” to each other when they are nominally 90 degrees to each other, such as for example, when they are 90 degrees to each other within a tolerance. Such tolerances can include, for example, manufacturing tolerances, measurement tolerances or the like.


The interspinous process device 10 of this invention includes (i) a main body portion 100 having a shaft 120 that is adapted to be disposed between adjacent spinous processes and a distal retention member 110 adapted to be disposed along a lateral side of a superior spinous process and an inferior spinous process, and (ii) a proximal retention member 200 adapted to be disposed along an opposite lateral side of the superior spinous process and the inferior spinous process. A damper ring 20 may also be located around shaft 120 of main body portion 100 between distal retention member 110 and proximal retention member 200. Preferably the proximal portion of shaft 120 has a larger diameter than the remainder of shaft 120 to define a recessed area between distal retention member 110 and the proximal portion of shaft 120 into which damper ring 20 may fit. See e.g. FIG. 1. Proximal retention member 200 includes a central portion 220 which defines a central lumen 225 into which a proximal portion of shaft 120 of main body portion 100 may be located so that proximal retention member 200 is rotatable with respect to main body portion 100.


Distal retention member 110 includes a distal upper wing 111 and a distal lower wing 112. Distal upper wing 111 is adapted to engage a distal side of a superior spinous process when device 10 is appropriately located in the space between adjacent spinous processes such that the longitudinal axis of damper ring 20 is generally perpendicular to the sagittal plane. See for example FIG. 15. In this position, distal lower wing 112 is adapted to engage a distal side of an inferior spinous process. As shown herein, distal retention member 110 has a generally elliptical configuration with a major axis A1 and a minor axis A2. Although an elliptical configuration is preferred, any other geometrical shape may be used as long as distal retention member 110 presents a smaller dimension in a first direction than in a direction normal to the first direction. The dimension of distal retention member 110 along the major axis A1 is greater than the distance between adjacent spinous processes when they are distracted to the desired spacing. Preferably, the dimension of distal retention member 110 along the minor axis A2 is about equal to the distance between the adjacent spinous processes when they are distracted to the desired spacing.


The proximal portion of shaft 120 includes a slot 130 that cooperates with a complementary key 230 disposed within central lumen 225 of proximal retention member 200. Preferably two slots 130 are located along the proximal portion of shaft 120 about 180 degrees apart. Even more preferably, slots 130 are aligned 180 degrees apart so that they are aligned along a line extending in a direction substantially parallel to the minor axis A2 of distal retention member 110. A plurality of lugs is also spaced around the periphery of shaft 120 adjacent to its proximal end. Preferably, these lugs are divided into two sets of lugs, which are spaced about 180 degrees apart such that each set is located between the pair of slots 130. As shown, upper lugs 151a and 151b are generally aligned with distal upper wing 111, while lower lugs 152a and 152b are generally aligned with distal lower wing 112. In addition, generally planar surfaces 135 are located along the proximal portion of shaft 120 about 180 degrees apart, with each of planar surfaces 135 located adjacent to one set of lugs between each of slots 130. Stated another way, planar surfaces 135 are substantially aligned along a line extending in a direction substantially parallel to major axis A1.


Proximal retention member 200 includes a proximal upper wing 210 and a proximal lower wing 215, as well as a central portion 220 and central lumen 225. As shown herein, proximal retention member 200 has a generally elliptical configuration with a major axis A3 and a minor axis A4. Proximal retention member 200 is formed as a circumferential bar. However, proximal retention member 200 may have a solid configuration similar to distal retention member 110. In addition, distal retention member 110 may be formed as a circumferential bar similar to proximal retention member 200. Although an elliptical configuration is preferred for the configuration of proximal retention member 200, any other geometrical shape may be used as long as proximal retention member 200 presents a smaller dimension in a first direction than in a direction normal to the first direction. The dimension of proximal retention member 200 along the major axis A3 is greater than the distance between adjacent spinous processes when they are distracted to the desired spacing. The length of proximal retention member 200 along major axis A3 is preferably greater than the length of distal retention member 110 along major axis A1. This greater dimension provides a visual cue for the surgeon so s/he can quickly determine which end is the proximal portion and which end is the distal portion. In addition, it is preferable that distal retention member 110 be relatively small to facilitate implantation of the device. Typically, there is less room on the distal side of the spinous processes for the surgeon to manipulate the device.


A key 230 is formed in central lumen 225 in complementary receiving fashion with respect to slot 130. Preferably two such keys 230 are formed in central lumen 225 and are located about 180 degrees apart along the minor axis A4. This allows keys 230 to be aligned with planar surfaces 135 when the major axis A1 of distal retention member 110 extends in a direction that is normal to the major axis A3 of proximal retention member 200.


An annular groove 250 is formed along an internal surface of central lumen 225 along a proximal portion thereof. Annular groove 250 is formed to act as a guide for lugs 151a, 151b, 152a, and 152b. As such, lugs 151a, 151b, 152a, and 152b fit within annular groove 250 and can move along groove 250 as proximal retention member 200 rotates with respect to main body portion 100 about the longitudinal axis of main body portion 100. Preferably, lugs 151a, 151b, 152a and 152b have tapered proximal ends to facilitate the movement of lugs 151a, 151b, 152a and 152b into annular groove 250 as main body portion 100 is moved in a direction along the longitudinal axis of shaft 120 into engagement with proximal retention member 200 during assembly of device 10. Preferably lugs 151a, 151b, 152a and 152b have a distal end that is substantially perpendicular to planar surface 135. This ensures that lugs 151a, 151b, 152a and 152b are difficult to remove from annular groove 250 and minimizes the possibility that main body portion 100 can be removed from proximal retention member 200 once device 10 is assembled. In addition, lugs 151a and 151b are separated a distance that is at least slightly greater than the width of key 230. Similarly, lugs 152a and 152b are separated a distance that is at least slightly greater than the width of key 230. This allows keys 230 to move past lugs 151a, 151b, 152a and 152b during assembly such that keys 230 are adjacent planar surfaces 135. Planar surfaces 135 provide sufficient space between the wall of central lumen 225 to allow keys 230 and the proximal portion of shaft 120 to fit within central lumen 225.


Key 230 and slot 130 are configured such that key 230 fits snugly within slot 130. Thus, when main body portion 100 is rotated with respect to proximal retention member 200 so that major axis A1 of distal retention member 110 extends in a direction that is aligned with and parallel to the major axis A3 of proximal retention member 200, key 230 drops into slot 130 to lock proximal retention member 200 with respect to main body portion 100. This ensures that when device 10 is in its locked configuration, device 10 can be located between adjacent spinous processes with shaft 120 and damper ring 20 located between adjacent spinous process such that they are substantially perpendicular to and cross the sagittal plane, distal upper wing 111 and distal lower wing 112 are located along the distal portion of the superior and inferior spinous processes respectively, and proximal upper retention member 210 and proximal lower retention member 215 are located along the proximal portion of the superior and inferior spinous processes respectively. This prevents device 10 from migrating from that location after implantation. Although a key and slot locking mechanism is preferred, other locking mechanisms may be used in connection with device 10 as long as the locking mechanism (i) allows relative rotation between main body portion 100 and proximal retention member 200, and (ii) locks main body portion 100 and proximal retention member 200 with respect to each other such that the major axis A1 of distal retention member 110 extends in the same direction as the major axis A3 of proximal retention member 200.


When device 10 is in the implantation configuration as shown for example in FIG. 3, proximal retention member 200 is oriented such that major axis A3 is substantially normal to the orientation of major axis A1 of distal retention member 110, i.e. major axis A3 extends in a direction substantially normal to the direction of major axis A1. When device 10 is in its locked and final configuration as shown for example in FIG. 5, major axis A3 of proximal retention member 200 extends in a direction that is substantially aligned with major axis A1 of distal retention member 110, i.e. major axis A3 extends in a direction substantially parallel to the direction of major axis A1. The arrangement of keys 230 and slots 130 allows main body portion 100 to be rotated with respect to proximal retention member 200 about 90 degrees in either a clockwise or counterclockwise direction between the initial implantation position and the final locked position.


The interspinous ligament is typically dissected with a cutting instrument, such as a simple scalpel, an electrosurgical device or the like, not shown, to create an appropriately sized opening in the interspinous ligament to allow passage of a distal portion of device 10 therethrough. See FIG. 11. This allows device 10 to be implanted in the space between adjacent spinous processes with a lateral approach. In most circumstances, the space between adjacent spinous processes may first need to be distracted with a distraction tool, not shown, to provide additional space and pain relief for the patient. After the physician confirms sufficient distraction, device 10 can then be placed in the space between the adjacent spinous processes. Device 10 can come in different sizes to accommodate different amounts of distraction/space needed between adjacent spinous processes.


With device 10 in the implantation configuration described above, distal retention member 110 is inserted through the opening formed in the interspinous ligament. See FIG. 12. Distal retention member 110 is oriented such that its major axis A1 is generally parallel to the axial plane, with minor axis A2 being generally parallel to the sagittal plane and the coronal plane. In this orientation, major axis A1 would not be parallel to or normal to the sagittal and coronal planes. See FIG. 12. In this orientation, the dimension of distal retention member 110 along minor axis A2 does not hinder movement of device 10 through the space between adjacent spinous processes. Distal retention member 110 thus may be passed through the space between adjacent spinous processes with minimal disruption to the surrounding tissue. Importantly, the supraspinous ligament remains undisturbed during the procedure. It may be necessary for a leading edge of distal retention member 110 to be first passed through the space between the adjacent interspinous processes, with major axis A1 not parallel to and not normal to the sagittal and coronal planes, in order to properly position device 10. Once the leading edge of distal retention member 110 passes through the space formed in the interspinous ligament, device 10 may be rotated about an axis normal to the longitudinal axis of implant 10 so the longitudinal axis of implant 10 becomes parallel to the coronal and axial planes and normal to the sagittal plane. Compare FIG. 12 with FIG. 13. This also places proximal retention member 200 along the proximal side of adjacent superior and inferior spinous processes with major axis A3 generally parallel to the sagittal and coronal planes and generally normal to the axial plane. Of course, the orientation of distal retention member 110 may have to be adjusted during the procedure in order to be properly placed in position. For example, distal retention member 110 may have to be rotated around the (i) longitudinal axis of device 10, (ii) its major axis, and/or (iii) its minor axis during some portion or all of the implantation procedure. These manipulations may be necessary because of individual characteristics of the anatomy of the body into which device 10 is to be located.


Once distal retention member 110 is adjacent to the distal side of the adjacent spinous processes, see FIGS. 13 and 14, distal retention member 110 may be rotated with respect to proximal retention member 200 about the longitudinal axis of main body portion 100. Distal retention member 110 may be rotated either clockwise or counterclockwise. This locks distal retention member 110 with respect to proximal retention member 200 such that major axis A3 of proximal retention member 200 and major axis A1 of distal retention member 110 are oriented such that they extend in the same direction and thus are generally parallel to each other and the sagittal and coronal planes and generally normal to the axial plane. As noted above, major axes A1 and A3 of distal retention member 110 and proximal retention member 200 respectively define a dimension that is greater than the distance between adjacent spinous processes, with the dimension for proximal retention member 200 preferably being greater. Of course, the distance between proximal retention member 200 and distal retention member 110 should be slightly greater than the distance between the distal side of the adjacent spinous process and the proximal side of the adjacent spinous processes. In this manner, device 10 is held in place by proximal retention member 200 and distal retention member 110.


Device 10 can be constructed with various biocompatible materials such as, for example, titanium, titanium alloy, surgical steel, biocompatible metal alloys, stainless steel, Nitinol, plastic, polyetheretherketone (PEEK), carbon fiber, ultra-high molecular weight (UHMW) polyethylene, and other biocompatible polymeric materials. The material of device 10 can have, for example, a compressive strength similar to or higher than that of bone. In one embodiment, damper ring 20, which is placed between the two adjacent spinous processes, is formed from a material having an elastic modulus higher than the elastic modulus of the bone of the spinous processes. In another embodiment, damper ring 20 is formed from a material having a higher elastic modulus than the materials used to form main body portion 100 and proximal retention member 200. For example, damper ring 20 may have an elastic modulus higher than bone, while main body portion 100 and proximal retention member 100 have a lower elastic modulus than bone. Preferably, damper ring 20 is formed of a compliant material, such as silicone, to dampen the shock when the spinal column is moved into extension.


While various embodiments of the invention have been described above, it should be understood that they have been presented by way of example only, and not limitation. The foregoing description of the interspinous process device is not intended to be exhaustive or to limit the invention of the device. Many modifications and variations will be apparent to the practitioner skilled in the art. It is intended that the scope of the invention be defined by the following claims and their equivalents.

Claims
  • 1. A device, comprising: a first retention member having a central portion defining a longitudinal axis and an upper wing extending outward from the central portion transverse to the longitudinal axis, a lower wing extending outward from the central portion in a direction opposite to the upper wing and transverse to the longitudinal axis wherein the upper wing of the first retention member and the lower wing of the first retention member are configured to be disposed along a first side of a superior spinous process and an inferior spinous process; anda main body portion extending along the longitudinal axis and having a second retention member including an upper wing extending outward from the main body portion transverse to the longitudinal axis a lower wing extending outward from the main body portion in a direction opposite to the upper wing and transverse to the longitudinal axis wherein the upper wing of the second retention member and the lower wing of the second retention member are configured to be disposed along a second side of a superior spinous process and an inferior spinous process opposite the first side and being rotatable with respect to the first retention member between a first position such that upper and lower wings of the main body are disposed perpendicular to the upper and lower wings of the first retention member and a second position such that upper and lower wings of the main body are disposed parallel to the upper and lower wings of the first retention member,wherein the main body portion is rotatable between the first position and the second position.
  • 2. The device of claim 1 wherein the longitudinal axis of the main body portion extends from a proximal portion to a distal portion of the main body portion and wherein the second retention member is adjacent to the distal portion.
  • 3. The device of claim 2 wherein in the second position the main body portion is not rotatable with respect to the first retention member.
  • 4. The device of claim 1 wherein the second retention member has a surface area that is smaller than the surface area of the first retention member.
  • 5. The device of claim 1 further comprising a damper ring disposed about the main body portion between the first retention member and the second retention member.
  • 6. The device of claim 1 wherein the first retention member defines a first major axis and a first minor axis and the second retention member defines a second major axis and a second minor axis such that in the first position the first major axis and the first minor axis extend in directions that are generally perpendicular to the directions in which the second major axis and the second minor axis respectively extend.
  • 7. The device of claim 1 wherein the first retention member defines a first major axis and a first minor axis and the second retention member defines a second major axis and a second minor axis such that in the second position the first major axis and the first minor axis extend in directions that are generally parallel to the directions in which the second major axis and the second minor axis respectively extend.
  • 8. The device of claim 7 further comprising a lock adapted to lock the first retention member and the main body portion in the second position.
  • 9. A device, comprising: a proximal retention member defining a central lumen therein, the proximal retention member includes a central portion defining a longitudinal axis and an upper wing extending outward from the central portion transverse to the longitudinal axis a lower wing extending outward from the central portion in a direction opposite to the upper wing and transverse to the longitudinal axis wherein the upper wing of the proximal retention member and the lower wing of the proximal retention member are configured to be disposed along a first side of a superior spinous process and an inferior spinous process;a main body portion extending along the longitudinal axis and having a distal retention member and a shaft having a proximal portion and a distal portion extending proximally from the distal retention member wherein the proximal portion is disposed in the central lumen, the distal retention member including an upper wing extending outward from the main body portion transverse to the longitudinal axis a lower wing extending outward from the main body portion in a direction opposite to the upper wing and transverse to the longitudinal axis wherein the upper wing of the distal retention member and the lower wing of the distal retention member are configured to be disposed along a second side of a superior spinous process and an inferior spinous process opposite the first side;at least one key disposed in the central lumen; andthe proximal portion of the shaft defining at least one slot adapted to engage the at least one key,wherein the main body portion is rotatable between a first position such that upper and lower wings of the main body are disposed perpendicular to the upper and lower wings of the first retention member and a second position such that upper and lower wings of the main body are disposed parallel to the upper and lower wings of the first retention member.
  • 10. The device of claim 9 wherein the proximal retention member includes a major axis and a minor axis and further comprising two keys located about 180 degrees apart along the minor axis.
  • 11. The device of claim 10 wherein the distal retention member includes a major axis and a minor axis and the proximal portion of the shaft defines two slots therein about 180 degrees apart generally aligned along a line substantially parallel to the minor axis of the distal retention member.
  • 12. The device of claim 10 wherein the proximal portion of the shaft defines two generally planar surfaces each disposed between the two slots.
  • 13. The device of claim 12 further comprising a plurality of lugs disposed adjacent to the proximal portion of the shaft wherein the lugs are adjacent to the generally planar surfaces.
  • 14. The device of claim 9 further comprising a plurality of lugs disposed adjacent to the proximal portion of the shaft.
  • 15. The device of claim 14 further comprising an annular groove disposed about the central lumen adjacent to a proximal portion thereof with the plurality of lugs adapted to be disposed in and movable with respect to the annular groove.
  • 16. The device of claim 9 further comprising a damper ring disposed about the shaft.
US Referenced Citations (251)
Number Name Date Kind
624969 Peterson May 1899 A
1153797 Kegreisz Sep 1915 A
1516347 Pataky Nov 1924 A
2077804 Morrison Apr 1937 A
2299308 Creighton Oct 1942 A
2485531 Dzus et al. Oct 1949 A
2607370 Anderson Aug 1952 A
2677369 Knowles May 1954 A
2685877 Dobelle Aug 1954 A
3065659 Eriksson et al. Nov 1962 A
3426364 Lumb Feb 1969 A
3648691 Lumb et al. Mar 1972 A
3779239 Fischer et al. Dec 1973 A
4011602 Rybicki et al. Mar 1977 A
4237875 Termanini Dec 1980 A
4257409 Bacal et al. Mar 1981 A
4274324 Giannuzzi Jun 1981 A
4289123 Dunn Sep 1981 A
4401112 Rezaian Aug 1983 A
4519100 Willis et al. May 1985 A
4553273 Wu Nov 1985 A
4554914 Kapp et al. Nov 1985 A
4573454 Hoffman Mar 1986 A
4599086 Doty Jul 1986 A
4604995 Stephens et al. Aug 1986 A
4611582 Duff Sep 1986 A
4632101 Freedland Dec 1986 A
4636217 Ogilvie et al. Jan 1987 A
4646998 Pate Mar 1987 A
4657550 Daher Apr 1987 A
4662808 Camilleri May 1987 A
4686970 Dove et al. Aug 1987 A
4704057 McSherry Nov 1987 A
4759769 Hedman et al. Jul 1988 A
4787378 Sodhi Nov 1988 A
4822226 Kennedy Apr 1989 A
4827918 Olerud May 1989 A
4834600 Lemke May 1989 A
4863476 Shepperd Sep 1989 A
4886405 Blomberg Dec 1989 A
4892545 Day et al. Jan 1990 A
4913144 Del Medico Apr 1990 A
4931055 Bumpus et al. Jun 1990 A
4932975 Main et al. Jun 1990 A
4969887 Sodhi Nov 1990 A
5011484 Breard Apr 1991 A
5047055 Bao et al. Sep 1991 A
5059193 Kuslich Oct 1991 A
5092866 Breard et al. Mar 1992 A
5098433 Freedland Mar 1992 A
5171278 Pisharodi Dec 1992 A
5201734 Cozad et al. Apr 1993 A
5290312 Kojimoto et al. Mar 1994 A
5306275 Bryan Apr 1994 A
5306310 Siebels Apr 1994 A
5312405 Korotko et al. May 1994 A
5360430 Lin Nov 1994 A
5366455 Dove Nov 1994 A
5390683 Pisharodi Feb 1995 A
5395370 Muller et al. Mar 1995 A
5401269 Buttner-Janz et al. Mar 1995 A
5403316 Ashman Apr 1995 A
5415661 Holmes May 1995 A
5437672 Alleyne Aug 1995 A
5437674 Worcel et al. Aug 1995 A
5439463 Lin Aug 1995 A
5454812 Lin Oct 1995 A
5458641 Ramirez Jimenez Oct 1995 A
5474561 Yao Dec 1995 A
5496318 Howland et al. Mar 1996 A
5518498 Lindenberg et al. May 1996 A
5554191 Lahille et al. Sep 1996 A
5562662 Brumfield et al. Oct 1996 A
5562735 Margulies Oct 1996 A
5571192 Schonhoffer Nov 1996 A
5609634 Voydeville Mar 1997 A
5609635 Michelson Mar 1997 A
5628756 Barker, Jr. et al. May 1997 A
5630816 Kambin May 1997 A
5645599 Samani Jul 1997 A
5653762 Pisharodi Aug 1997 A
5653763 Errico et al. Aug 1997 A
5658335 Allen Aug 1997 A
5665122 Kambin Sep 1997 A
5674295 Ray et al. Oct 1997 A
5676702 Ratron Oct 1997 A
5685826 Bonutti Nov 1997 A
5690649 Li Nov 1997 A
5693100 Pisharodi Dec 1997 A
5702395 Hopf Dec 1997 A
5702452 Argenson et al. Dec 1997 A
5702455 Saggar Dec 1997 A
5707390 Bonutti Jan 1998 A
5716416 Lin Feb 1998 A
5723013 Jeanson et al. Mar 1998 A
5725341 Hofmeister Mar 1998 A
5746762 Bass May 1998 A
5755797 Baumgartner May 1998 A
5800547 Schafer et al. Sep 1998 A
5810815 Morales Sep 1998 A
5836948 Zucherman et al. Nov 1998 A
5849004 Bramlet Dec 1998 A
5860977 Zucherman et al. Jan 1999 A
5888196 Bonutti Mar 1999 A
5976186 Bao et al. Nov 1999 A
5980523 Jackson Nov 1999 A
6022376 Assell et al. Feb 2000 A
6048342 Zucherman et al. Apr 2000 A
6068630 Zucherman et al. May 2000 A
6126689 Brett Oct 2000 A
6126691 Kasra et al. Oct 2000 A
6127597 Beyar et al. Oct 2000 A
6132464 Martin Oct 2000 A
6190413 Sutcliffe Feb 2001 B1
6190414 Young Feb 2001 B1
6214050 Huene Apr 2001 B1
6293949 Justis et al. Sep 2001 B1
6336930 Stalcup et al. Jan 2002 B1
6348053 Cachia Feb 2002 B1
6352537 Strnad Mar 2002 B1
6364883 Santilli Apr 2002 B1
6371987 Weiland et al. Apr 2002 B1
6375682 Fleischmann et al. Apr 2002 B1
6402750 Atkinson et al. Jun 2002 B1
6402751 Hoeck et al. Jun 2002 B1
6419704 Ferree Jul 2002 B1
6440169 Elberg et al. Aug 2002 B1
6447513 Griggs Sep 2002 B1
6451019 Zucherman et al. Sep 2002 B1
6520991 Huene Feb 2003 B2
6554833 Levy Apr 2003 B2
6582433 Yun Jun 2003 B2
6582467 Teitelbaum et al. Jun 2003 B1
6592585 Lee et al. Jul 2003 B2
6626944 Taylor Sep 2003 B1
6645207 Dixon et al. Nov 2003 B2
6685742 Jackson Feb 2004 B1
6695842 Zucherman et al. Feb 2004 B2
6709435 Lin Mar 2004 B2
6723126 Berry Apr 2004 B1
6730126 Boehm, Jr. et al. May 2004 B2
6733534 Sherman May 2004 B2
6736818 Perren et al. May 2004 B2
6743257 Castro Jun 2004 B2
6758863 Estes et al. Jul 2004 B2
6761720 Senegas Jul 2004 B1
6770096 Bolger et al. Aug 2004 B2
6783530 Levy Aug 2004 B1
6835205 Atkinson et al. Dec 2004 B2
6905512 Paes et al. Jun 2005 B2
6946000 Senegas et al. Sep 2005 B2
6981975 Michelson Jan 2006 B2
7011685 Arnin et al. Mar 2006 B2
7041136 Goble et al. May 2006 B2
7048736 Robinson et al. May 2006 B2
7081120 Li et al. Jul 2006 B2
7087083 Pasquet et al. Aug 2006 B2
7097648 Globerman et al. Aug 2006 B1
7101375 Zucherman et al. Sep 2006 B2
7163558 Senegas et al. Jan 2007 B2
7201751 Zucherman et al. Apr 2007 B2
7217293 Branch, Jr. May 2007 B2
7238204 Le Couedic et al. Jul 2007 B2
7306628 Zucherman et al. Dec 2007 B2
7335203 Winslow et al. Feb 2008 B2
7377942 Berry May 2008 B2
7442208 Mathieu et al. Oct 2008 B2
7445637 Taylor Nov 2008 B2
7458981 Fielding et al. Dec 2008 B2
7582106 Teitelbaum et al. Sep 2009 B2
7611316 Panasik et al. Nov 2009 B2
7988708 Yeh Aug 2011 B2
20020143331 Zucherman et al. Oct 2002 A1
20030040746 Mitchell et al. Feb 2003 A1
20030065330 Zucherman et al. Apr 2003 A1
20030153915 Nekozuka et al. Aug 2003 A1
20040097931 Mitchell May 2004 A1
20040133204 Davies Jul 2004 A1
20040167625 Beyar et al. Aug 2004 A1
20040260397 Lambrecht et al. Dec 2004 A1
20050010293 Zucherman et al. Jan 2005 A1
20050049708 Atkinson et al. Mar 2005 A1
20050165398 Reiley Jul 2005 A1
20050203512 Hawkins et al. Sep 2005 A1
20050203624 Serhan et al. Sep 2005 A1
20050228391 Levy et al. Oct 2005 A1
20050245937 Winslow Nov 2005 A1
20050261768 Trieu Nov 2005 A1
20050288672 Ferree Dec 2005 A1
20060004447 Mastrorio et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060004455 Leonard et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060015181 Elberg Jan 2006 A1
20060064165 Zucherman et al. Mar 2006 A1
20060084983 Kim Apr 2006 A1
20060084985 Kim Apr 2006 A1
20060084987 Kim Apr 2006 A1
20060084988 Kim Apr 2006 A1
20060085069 Kim Apr 2006 A1
20060085070 Kim Apr 2006 A1
20060085074 Raiszadeh Apr 2006 A1
20060089654 Lins et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060089719 Trieu Apr 2006 A1
20060095136 McLuen May 2006 A1
20060106381 Ferree et al. May 2006 A1
20060106397 Lins May 2006 A1
20060111728 Abdou May 2006 A1
20060116690 Pagano Jun 2006 A1
20060122620 Kim Jun 2006 A1
20060136060 Taylor Jun 2006 A1
20060184247 Edidin et al. Aug 2006 A1
20060184248 Edidin et al. Aug 2006 A1
20060195102 Malandain Aug 2006 A1
20060217726 Maxy et al. Sep 2006 A1
20060235387 Peterman Oct 2006 A1
20060235532 Meunier et al. Oct 2006 A1
20060241601 Trautwein et al. Oct 2006 A1
20060241613 Bruneau et al. Oct 2006 A1
20060241757 Anderson Oct 2006 A1
20060247623 Anderson et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060247640 Blackwell et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060264938 Zucherman et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060271044 Petrini et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060271049 Zucherman et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060293662 Boyer, II et al. Dec 2006 A1
20060293663 Walkenhorst et al. Dec 2006 A1
20070032790 Aschmann et al. Feb 2007 A1
20070043362 Malandain et al. Feb 2007 A1
20070142915 Altarac et al. Jun 2007 A1
20070151116 Malandain Jul 2007 A1
20070162000 Perkins Jul 2007 A1
20070191838 Bruneau et al. Aug 2007 A1
20070198091 Boyer et al. Aug 2007 A1
20070225807 Phan et al. Sep 2007 A1
20070233068 Bruneau et al. Oct 2007 A1
20070233081 Pasquet et al. Oct 2007 A1
20070233089 DiPoto et al. Oct 2007 A1
20070265625 Zucherman et al. Nov 2007 A1
20070270834 Bruneau et al. Nov 2007 A1
20070276369 Allard et al. Nov 2007 A1
20070276493 Malandain et al. Nov 2007 A1
20070282443 Globerman et al. Dec 2007 A1
20080021457 Anderson et al. Jan 2008 A1
20080058934 Malandain et al. Mar 2008 A1
20080161818 Kloss et al. Jul 2008 A1
20080183211 Lamborne et al. Jul 2008 A1
20080183218 Mueller et al. Jul 2008 A1
20080221685 Altarac et al. Sep 2008 A9
20080262617 Froehlich et al. Oct 2008 A1
20090234389 Chuang et al. Sep 2009 A1
20090270918 Attia et al. Oct 2009 A1
20100268277 Bruneau et al. Oct 2010 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (52)
Number Date Country
2821678 Nov 1979 DE
3922044 Feb 1991 DE
4012622 Jul 1991 DE
0322334 Feb 1992 EP
0767636 Jan 1999 EP
1004276 May 2000 EP
1138268 Oct 2001 EP
1302169 Apr 2003 EP
1330987 Jul 2003 EP
1982664 Oct 2008 EP
2623085 May 1989 FR
2625097 Jun 1989 FR
2681525 Mar 1993 FR
2700941 Aug 1994 FR
2703239 Oct 1994 FR
2707864 Jan 1995 FR
2717675 Sep 1995 FR
2722087 Jan 1996 FR
2722088 Jan 1996 FR
2724554 Mar 1996 FR
2725892 Apr 1996 FR
2730156 Aug 1996 FR
2731643 Sep 1996 FR
2775183 Aug 1999 FR
2799948 Apr 2001 FR
2816197 May 2002 FR
02-224660 Sep 1990 JP
09-075381 Mar 1997 JP
988281 Jan 1983 SU
1484348 Jun 1989 SU
WO 9426192 Nov 1994 WO
WO 9426195 Nov 1994 WO
WO 9718769 May 1997 WO
WO 9820939 May 1998 WO
WO 9926562 Jun 1999 WO
WO 0044319 Aug 2000 WO
WO 0154598 Aug 2001 WO
WO 03057055 Jul 2003 WO
WO 2004047689 Jun 2004 WO
WO 2004047691 Jun 2004 WO
WO 2004084768 Oct 2004 WO
WO 2005009300 Feb 2005 WO
WO 2005011507 Feb 2005 WO
WO 2005044118 May 2005 WO
WO 2005048856 Jun 2005 WO
WO 2005110258 Nov 2005 WO
WO 2006064356 Jun 2006 WO
WO 2007034516 Mar 2007 WO
WO 2007052975 May 2007 WO
WO 2009083276 Jul 2009 WO
WO 2009083583 Jul 2009 WO
WO 2009098536 Aug 2009 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (61)
Entry
“Dispositivo Intervertebrale Ammortizzante DIAM,” date unknown, p. 1.
“Tecnica Operatoria Per II Posizionamento Della Protesi DIAM,” date unknown, pp. 1-3.
“Wallis Operative Technique: Surgical Procedure for Treatment of Degenerative Disc Disease (DDD) of Lumbar Spine,” date unknown, pp. 1-24, Spine Next, an Abbott Laboratories company, Bordeaux, France.
Benzel et al., “Posterior Cervical Interspinous Compression Wiring and Fusion for Mid to Low Cervical Spinal Injuries,” J. Neurosurg., Jun. 1989, pp. 893-899, vol. 70.
Caserta et al., “Elastic Stabilization Alone or Combined with Rigid Fusion in Spinal Surgery: a Biomechanical Study and Clinical Experience Based on 82 Cases,” Eur. Spine J., Oct. 2002, pp. S192-S197, vol. 11, Suppl. 2.
Christie et al., “Dynamic Interspinous Process Technology,” SPINE, 2005, pp. S73-S78, vol. 30, No. 16S.
Cousin Biotech, “Analysis of Clinical Experience with a Posterior Shock-Absorbing Implant,” date unknown, pp. 2-9.
Cousin Biotech, Dispositif Intervertébral Amortissant, Jun. 1998, pp. 1-4.
Cousin Biotech, Technique Operatoire de la Prothese DIAM, date unknown, Annexe 1, pp. 1-8.
Dickman et al., “The Interspinous Method of Posterior Atlantoaxial Arthrodesis,” J. Neurosurg., Feb. 1991, pp. 190-198, vol. 74.
Dubois et al., “Dynamic Neutralization: A New Concept for Restabilization of the Spine,” Lumbar Segmental Insability, Szpalski et al., eds., 1999, pp. 233-240, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Ebara et al., “Inoperative Measurement of Lumbar Spinal Instability,” SPINE, 1992, pp. S44-S50, vol. 17, No. 3S.
Fassio et al., “Treatment of Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Instability L4-L5 by Interspinous Ligamentoplasty,” Rachis, Dec. 1991, pp. 465-474, vol. 3, No. 6.
Fassio, “Mise au Point Sur la Ligamentoplastie Inter-Epineuse Lombaire Dans les Instabilites,” Maîtrise Orthopéclique, Jul. 1993, pp. 18, No. 25.
Garner et al., “Development and Preclinical Testing of a New Tension-Band Device for the Spine: the Loop System,” Eur. Spine J., Aug. 7, 2002, pp. 5186-S191, vol. 11, Suppl. 2.
Guang et al., “Interspinous Process Segmental Instrumentation with Bone-Button-Wire for Correction of Scoliosis,” Chinese Medical J., 1990, pp. 721-725, vol. 103.
Guizzardi et al., “The Use of DIAM (Interspinous Stress-Breaker Device) in the Prevention of Chronic Low Back Pain in Young Patients Operated on for Large Dimension Lumbar Disc Herniation,” 12th Eur. Cong. Neurosurg., Sep. 7-12, 2003, pp. 835-839, Port.
Hambly et al., “Tension Band Wiring-Bone Grafting for Spondylolysis and Spondylolisthesis,” SPINE, 1989, pp. 455-460, vol. 14, No. 4.
Kiwerski, “Rehabilitation of Patients with Thoracic Spine Injury Treated by Spring Alloplasty,” Int. J. Rehab. Research, 1983, pp. 469-474, vol. 6, No. 4.
Kramer et al., “Intervetertebral Disk Diseases: Causes, Diagnosis, Treatment and Prophylaxis,” pp. 244-249, Medical, 1990.
Laudet et al., “Comportement Bio-Mécanique D'Un Ressort Inter-Apophysaire Vertébral Postérieur Analyse Expérimentale Due Comportement Discal En Compression Et En Flexion/Extension,” Rachis, 1993, vol. 5, No. 2.
Mah et al., “Threaded K-Wire Spinous Process Fixation of the Axis for Modified Gallie Fusion in Children and Adolescents,” J. Pediatric Othopaedics, 1989, pp. 675-679, vol. 9.
Mariottini et al., “Preliminary Results of a Soft Novel Lumbar Intervertebral Prothesis (DIAM) in the Degenerative Spinal Pathology,” Acta Neurochir., Adv. Peripheral Nerve Surg. and Minimal Invas. Spinal Surg., 2005, pp. 129-131, vol. 92, Suppl.
McDonnell et al., “Posterior Atlantoaxial Fusion: Indications and Techniques,” Techniques in Spinal Fusion and Stabilization, Hitchon et al., eds., 1995, pp. 92-106, Ch. 9, Thieme, New York.
Minns et al., “Preliminary Design and Experimental Studies of a Novel Soft Implant for Correcting Sagittal Plane Instability in the Lumbar Spine,” SPINE, 1997, pp. 1819-1825, vol. 22, No. 16.
Müller, “Restauration Dynamique de la Stabilité Rachidienne,” Tiré de la Sulzer Technical Review, Jan. 1999, Sulzer Management Ltd, Winterthur, Switzerland.
Pennal et al., “Stenosis of the Lumbar Spinal Canal,” Clinical Neurosurgery: Proceedings of the Congress of Neurological Surgeons, St. Louis, Missouri, 1970, Tindall et al., eds., 1971, Ch. 6, pp. 86-105, vol. 18.
Petrini et al., “Analisi Di Un'Esperienza Clinica Con Un Impianto Posteriore Ammortizzante,” S.O.T.I.M.I. Società di Ortopedia e Traumatologia dell'Italia Meridionale e Insulare 90 ° Congresso, Jun. 21-23, 2001, Paestum.
Petrini et al., “Stabilizzazione Elastica,” Patologia Degenerativa del Rachide Lombare, Oct. 5-6, 2001, Rimini.
Porter, “Spinal Stenosis and Neurogenic Claudication,” SPINE, Sep. 1, 1996, pp. 2046-2052, vol. 21, No. 17.
Pupin et al., “Clinical Experience with a Posterior Shock-Absorbing Implant in Lumbar Spine,” World Spine 1: First Interdisciplinary World Congress on Spinal Surgery and Related Disciplines, Aug. 27-Sep. 1, 2000, Berlin, Germany.
Rengachary et al., “Cervical Spine Stabilization with Flexible, Multistrand Cable System,” Techniques in Spinal Fusion and Stabilization, Hitchon et al., eds., 1995, pp. 79-81, Ch. 7, Thieme, New York.
Richards et al., “The Treatment Mechanism of an interspinous Process Implant for Lumbar Neurogenic Intermittent Claudication,” SPINE, 2005, pp. 744-749, vol. 30, No. 7.
Scarfò, “Instability/Stenosis: Holistic Approach for Less Invasive Surgery,” date unknown, University of Siena, Siena, Italy.
Schiavone et al. , “The Use of Disc Assistance Prosthesis (DIAM) in Degenerative Lumbar Pathology: indications, Technique, Results,” Italian J. Spinal Disorders, 2003, pp. 213-220, vol. 3, No. 2.
Schlegel et al., “The Role of Distraction in improving the Space Available in the Lumbar Stenotic Canal and Foramen,” SPINE, 1994, pp. 2041-2047, vol. 19, No. 18.
Senegas et al., “Le Recalibrage du Canal Lornbaire, Alternative à la Laminectomie dans le Traitement des Sténoses du Canal Lombaire,” Revue de Chirurgie Orthopédique, 1988, pp. 15-22.
Senegas et al., “Stabilisation Lombaire Souple,” Instabilité Vertébrales Lombaires, Gastambide, ed., 1995, pp. 122-132, Expansion Scientifique Française, Paris, France.
Senegas, “La Ligamentoplastie Inter Vertébrale Lombaire, Alternative a L'Arthrodèse,” La Rnvuc de Medécine Orthopédique, Jun. 1990, pp. 33-35, No. 20.
Senecas, “La Ligamentopiastie Intervertébrale, Alternative à L'arthrodèse dans le Traitement des Instabilités Dégénératives,” Acta Othopaedica Belgica, 1991, pp. 221-226, vol. 57, Suppl. I.
Senegas, “Mechanical Supplementation by Non-Rigid Fixation in Degenerative Intervertebral Lumbar Segments: the Wallis System,” Eur. Spine J., 2002, p. S164-S169, vol. 11, Suppl. 2.
Senegas, “Rencontre,” Maîtrise Orthopédique, May 1995, pp. 1-3, No. 44.
Serhan, “Spinal Implants: Past, Present, and Future.” 19th International IEEE/EMBS Conference, Oct. 30-Nov. 2, 1997, pp. 2636-2639, Chicago, Illinois.
Spadea et al., “Interspinous Fusion for the Treatment of Herniated Intervertebral Discs: Utilizing a Lumbar Spinous Process as a Bone Graft,” Annals of Surgery, 1952, pp. 982-986, vol. 136, No. 6.
Sulzer Innotec, “DIAM—Modified CAD Geometry and Meshing,” date unknown.
Taylor at al., “Analyse d'une expérience clinique: d'un implant postérieur amortissant,” Rachis Revue de Pathologie Vertébrale, Oct./Nov. 1999, vol. 11, No. 4-5, Gieda Inter Rachis.
Taylor at al. “Surgical Requirement for the Posterior Control of the Rotational Centers,” date unknown.
Taylor et al., “Technical and Anatomical Considerations for the Placement of a Posterior Interspinous Stabilizer,” 2004, pp. 1-10, Medtronic Sofamor Danek USA, Inc., Memphis, Tennessee.
Taylor, “Biomechanical Requirements for the Posterior Control of the Centers of Rotation,” Swiss Spine Institute International Symposium: Progress in Spinal Fixation, Jun. 21-22, 2002, pp. 1-2, Swiss Spine Institute, Bern, Switzerland.
Taylor, “Non-Fusion Technologies of the Posterior Column: A New Posterior Shock Absorber,” International Symposium on Intervertebral Disc Replacement and Non-Fusion-Technology, May 3-5, 2001, Spine Arthroplasty.
Taylor, “Posterior Dynamic Stabilization using the DIAM (Device for Intervertebral Assisted Motion),” date unknown, pp. 1-5.
Taylor, “Présentation à un an d'un dispositif amortissant d'assistance discale,” 5èmes journées Avances & Controverses en pathologie rachidienne, Oct. 1-2, 1998, Faculté Libre de Médecine de Lille.
Tsuji et al., “Ceramic Interspinous Block (CISB) Assisted Anterior Interbody Fusion,” J. Spinal Disorders, 1990, pp. 77-86, vol. 3, No. 1.
Vangilder, “Interspinous, Laminar, and Facet Posterior Cervical Bone Fusions,” Techniques in Spinal Fusion and Stabilization, Hitchon et al., eds., 1995, pp. 135-146, Ch. 13, Thieme, New York.
Voydeville et al., “Experimental Lumbar Instability and Artificial Ligament,” Eur. J. Orthop. Surg. Traumatol., Jul. 15, 2000, pp. 167-176, vol. 10.
Voydeville et al., “Lumbar Instability Treated by Intervertebral Ligamentoplasty with Smooth Wedges,” Orthopédie Traumatologie, 1992, pp. 259-264, vol. 2, No. 4.
Waldemar Link, “Spinal Surgery: Instrumentation and Implants for Spinal Surgery,” 1981, Link America Inc., New Jersey.
Wiltse et al., “The Treatment of Spinal Stenosis,” Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, Urist, ed., Mar.-Apr. 1976, pp. 83-91, No. 115.
Wisneski et al., “Decompressive Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis,” Seminars in Spine Surgery, Wiesel, ed., Jun. 1994, pp. 116-123, vol. 6, No. 2.
Zdeblick et al., “Two-Point Fixation of the Lumbar Spine Differential Stability in Rotation,” SPINE, 1991, pp. S298-S301, vol. 16, No. 6, Supplement.
Zucherman et al., “Clinical Efficacy of Spinal Instrumentation in Lumbar Degenerative Disc Disease,” SPINE, Jul. 1992, pp. 834-837, vol. 17, No. 7.
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20110098745 A1 Apr 2011 US