The invention relates to an intervertebral disk prosthesis for replacing in full or in part the natural disk that interconnects two vertebrae of the vertebral column, and regardless of which portion of the spine is concerned.
Each intervertebral disk of the vertebral column is constituted by a central element referred to as the nucleus pulposus that is enclosed in a roll of fibers referred to as the annulus. The disk interconnects two vertebral bodies and it controls movement of the vertebral column in flexing, inclination, and rotation. The disk can become damaged over time, as a result of effort, or of certain degenerative diseases, and that can give rise to the disk collapsing and/or to it functioning poorly. This can lead to various types of pathology, causing multiple pains of greater or lesser intensity and more or less severe handicaps.
This type of affection is treated by removing the unhealthy disk and replacing it either by an element that is movable or deformable or by an element that rigidly interconnects the two vertebrae in question.
Several types of prosthesis have been proposed for replacing intervertebral disks, but they are only partially satisfactory. They preserve intervertebral mobility and they restore the intervertebral distance to a value close to that ensured by a healthy disk. However in said mobility they impose particular dynamics that are not compatible with, or only partially compatible with the natural relative mobility between two vertebrae. In most situations, the prosthesis imposes dynamics specific thereto, with a center of rotation and various plane-on-plane guidances that inevitably interfere with the natural joint elements that remain between the two vertebrae, in particular the posterior articular facets. In this respect, it should be observed that the care with which a prosthesis is implanted is important since any inaccuracy in its positioning increases the severity of the conflict between the dynamics of the prosthesis and natural dynamics. This non-physiological mobility can give rise to undesirable clinical consequences. It can even be feared that there is a risk of a component migrating or of the prosthetic joint dislocating.
In addition, most known prostheses are unsuitable for restoring normal cervical or lumbar curvature. Restoring the intervertebral distance does not take account of the inclination needed for one vertebra relative to the other in the stack that leads to this curvature, where the existence of such curvature is useful for the normal biomechanics of the entire spine, and more particularly of the adjacent levels.
Furthermore, known prostheses are not adapted to absorbing impacts. A consequence of this inability, associated with the conflict between the natural dynamics and the dynamics of the joint, can lead to premature wear both of natural elements and of prosthetic elements, thereby running the risk of degrading the clinical state of the patient.
An intervertebral disk prosthesis known in particular from WO 2007/057555 comprises:
The present invention seeks to remedy the drawbacks of conventional prostheses and to constitute a prosthesis that is complementary to the prostheses described in the above-mentioned document while conserving the structural simplicity and ease of implantation thereof.
To this end, the present invention provides an intervertebral disk prosthesis that comprises:
By means of this structure, the connection between the two vertebrae is of two kinds:
In addition, the wedge-shape of the structure makes it possible to restore the curvature to the spine that is generally degraded by disk degeneration.
By way of example, the cushion is based on high-density polyethylene, on high-density polyurethane, on silicone, or on composites of these various materials.
According to an embodiment feature, each notch is defined by diverging faces such that the area of contact involved in the cushion depends on the extent to which it is flattened, and thus on the position and the load between the two vertebrae in question. In a particular embodiment of the invention, the front notch possesses, between its opening (its edges) and its bottom, two facing faces that define portions in relief that are interleaved. These portions in relief are interpenetrating teeth or interleaved bristles or spikes. This increases the amount of co-operating surface area and its variability as a function of criteria concerning the position and the load on the vertebrae. This particular configuration also makes it possible to have means for acting on more than the quantity of the contacting area since the portions concerned of the cushion have thickness, given the greater or lesser interleaving of the portions in relief while the prosthesis is in use. The properties that can be involved are the properties of a layer of material on either side of the notch and these properties are variable as a function of the degree of interleaving.
In preferred manner, the prosthesis includes a cushion contention membrane fastened to the plates. The contention membrane serves to avoid biological invasion and colonization of the prosthesis. Although all of the materials used are biocompatible, the membrane also serves to isolate the cushion completely from the adjacent biological medium and it forms a barrier against any particles from the cushion migrating into the organism.
The membrane may be a ring fastened to the plates (leaving direct cushion-to-plate contact), or it may be a hermetically sealed bag containing the cushion, and bonded to the plates by adhesive, for example, or indeed it may be a membrane that is sandwiched between each plate and a smaller plate riveted thereto, the other face of said smaller plate being in contact with the cushion.
Other structural arrangements appear on reading the text below. Particular mention is made of the existence of a tie between the two plates of the prosthesis enabling it to be held in a compressed state so as to make it easier to implant. One of the advantages of the prosthesis lies in it being easy to implant without requiring great accuracy since it does not require its degrees of freedom to be “matched” with the natural degrees of freedom that exist between the two vertebrae.
Other characteristics and advantages of the invention appear from the following description of a few embodiments.
Reference is made to the accompanying drawings, in which:
a, 6b and 6c are antero-posterior section views of three variant embodiments of the deformable cushion used in the prosthesis of the invention;
The end plates 5 and 6 of the prosthesis are in contact with the vertebral bodies 1a and 2a via surfaces on these bodies that have previously been prepared after removing the damaged natural disk. The outside surfaces of these plates may include anchor means, e.g. portions in relief, in order to improve fastening to the bone; fastening may also involve a screw or any equivalent element. The curvature of the spine is represented by the angle A that is imposed by the prosthesis on the relative orientation between these two vertebrae.
In
It should be observed in this figure that the plates 5 and 6 are of dimensions such that, in the posterior portion of the prosthesis, they are set back from the cushion, which projects beyond the plate over a portion 9 beside the edge of the wedge.
In
Finally,
In accordance with the invention, each of these half-prostheses comprises a cushion 60 with notches 61 and 62, interleaved indentations 63, a connection zone 64 defined between the bottoms of the notches 61 and 62, and plates 64 and 65, these plates having their outer surfaces textured 64a so as to encourage anchoring of the implant in the vertebral bodies.
The invention is not limited to the above description given by way of example. Thus, in a variant that is not shown, the indentations are curved, e.g. as circular arcs centered on the posterior side of the implant. In addition, the indentations may be replaced by bristles or spikes, as shown in
Number | Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
07 06987 | Oct 2007 | FR | national |
Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind | 371c Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
PCT/FR2008/001386 | 10/3/2008 | WO | 00 | 4/5/2010 |
Publishing Document | Publishing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
WO2009/074756 | 6/18/2009 | WO | A |
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4309777 | Patil | Jan 1982 | A |
5306308 | Gross et al. | Apr 1994 | A |
5320644 | Baumgartner | Jun 1994 | A |
5545229 | Parsons et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
5674294 | Bainville et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
5676702 | Ratron | Oct 1997 | A |
6136031 | Middleton | Oct 2000 | A |
6176882 | Biedermann et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6179874 | Cauthen | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6395035 | Bresina et al. | May 2002 | B2 |
6579321 | Gordon et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
7291171 | Ferree | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7578847 | Albert et al. | Aug 2009 | B2 |
7959678 | Filippi et al. | Jun 2011 | B2 |
8092533 | Melkent | Jan 2012 | B2 |
20010016774 | Bresina et al. | Aug 2001 | A1 |
20070191958 | Abdou | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070225810 | Colleran et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20080161919 | Melkent | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20110093075 | Duplessis et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2003 15 613 | Dec 2003 | DE |
1 532 950 | May 2005 | EP |
2 775 891 | Sep 1999 | FR |
2 787 017 | Jun 2000 | FR |
2 893 248 | May 2007 | FR |
2 894 808 | Jun 2007 | FR |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20100217397 A1 | Aug 2010 | US |