1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to a method and system for fixing and stabilizing a spinal column and, more particularly, to a method and system of spinal fixation in which one or more screw type fixing members are implanted and fixed into a portion of a patient's spinal column and flexible, semi-rigid rods or plates are connected and fixed to the upper ends of the fixing members to provide dynamic stabilization of the spinal column.
2. Description of the Related Art
Degenerative spinal column diseases, such as disc degenerative diseases (DDD), spinal stenosis, spondylolisthesis, and so on, need surgical operation if they do not take a turn for the better by conservative management. Typically, spinal decompression is the first surgical procedure that is performed. The primary purpose of decompression is to reduce pressure in the spinal canal and on nerve roots located therein by removing a certain tissue of the spinal column to reduce or eliminate the pressure and pain caused by the pressure. If the tissue of the spinal column is removed the pain is reduced but the spinal column is weakened. Therefore, fusion surgery (e.g., ALIF, PLIF or posterolateral fusion) is often necessary for spinal stability following the decompression procedure. However, following the surgical procedure, fusion takes additional time to achieve maximum stability and a spinal fixation device is typically used to support the spinal column until a desired level of fusion is achieved. Depending on a patient's particular circumstances and condition, a spinal fixation surgery can sometimes be performed immediately following decompression, without performing the fusion procedure. The fixation surgery is performed in most cases because it provides immediate postoperative stability and, if fusion surgery has also been performed, it provides support of the spine until sufficient fusion and stability has been achieved.
Conventional methods of spinal fixation utilize a rigid spinal fixation device to support an injured spinal part and prevent movement of the injured part. These conventional spinal fixation devices include: fixing screws configured to be inserted into the spinal pedicle or sacral of the backbone to a predetermined depth and angle, rods or plates configured to be positioned adjacent to the injured spinal part, and coupling elements for connecting and coupling the rods or plates to the fixing screws such that the injured spinal part is supported and held in a relatively fixed position by the rods or plates.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,193,720 discloses a conventional spinal fixation device, in which connection members of a rod or plate type are mounted on the upper ends of at least one or more screws inserted into the spinal pedicle or sacral of the backbone. The connection units, such as the rods and plates, are used to stabilize the injured part of the spinal column which has been weakened by decompression. The connection units also prevent further pain and injury to the patient by substantially restraining the movement of the spinal column. However, because the connection units prevent normal movement of the spinal column, after prolonged use, the spinal fixation device can cause ill effects, such as “junctional syndrome” (transitional syndrome) or “fusion disease” resulting in further complications and abnormalities associated with the spinal column. In particular, due to the high rigidity of the rods or plates used in conventional fixation devices, the patient's fixed joints are not allowed to move after the surgical operation, and the movement of the spinal joints located above or under the operated area is increased. Consequently, such spinal fixation devices cause decreased mobility of the patient and increased stress and instability to the spinal column joints adjacent to the operated area.
It has been reported that excessive rigid spinal fixation is not helpful to the fusion process due to load shielding caused by rigid fixation. Thus, trials using load sharing semi-rigid spinal fixation devices have been performed to eliminate this problem and assist the bone fusion process. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 5,672,175, U.S. Pat. No. 5,540,688, and U.S. Pub No 2001/0037111 disclose dynamic spine stabilization devices having flexible designs that permit axial load translation (i.e., along the vertical axis of the spine) for bone fusion promotion. However, because these devices are intended for use following a bone fusion procedure, they are not well-suited for spinal fixation without fusion. Thus, in the end result, these devices do not prevent the problem of rigid fixation resulting from fusion.
To solve the above-described problems associated with rigid fixation, non-fusion technologies have been developed. The Graf band is one example of a non-fusion fixation device that is applied after decompression without bone fusion. The Graf band is composed of a polyethylene band and pedicle screws to couple the polyethylene band to the spinal vertebrae requiring stabilization. The primary purpose of the Graf band is to prevent sagittal rotation (flexion instability) of the injured spinal parts. Thus, it is effective in selected cases but is not appropriate for cases that require greater stability and fixation. See, Kanayarna et al, Journal of Neurosurgery 95(1 Suppl):5-10, 2001, Markwalder & Wenger, Acta Neurochrgica 145(3):209-14.). Another non-fusion fixation device called “Dynesys” has recently been introduced. See Stoll et al, European Spine Journal 11 Suppl 2:S170-8, 2002, Schmoelz et al, J of spinal disorder & techniques 16(4):418-23, 2003. The Dynesys device is similar to the Graf band except it uses a polycarburethane spacer between the screws to maintain the distance between the heads of two corresponding pedicle screws and, hence, adjacent vertebrae in which the screws are fixed. Early reports by the inventors of the Dynesys device indicate it has been successful in many cases. However, it has not yet been determined whether the Dynesys device can maintain long-term stability with flexibility and durability in a controlled study. Because it has polyethylene components and interfaces, there is a risk of mechanical failure. Furthermore, due to the mechanical configuration of the device, the surgical technique required to attach the device to the spinal column is complex and complicated.
U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,282,863 and 4,748,260 disclose a flexible spinal stabilization system and method using a plastic, non-metallic rod. U.S. patent publication no. 2003/0083657 discloses another example of a flexible spinal stabilization device that uses a flexible elongate member. These devices are flexible but they are not well-suited for enduring long-term axial loading and stress. Additionally, the degree of desired flexibility vs. rigidity may vary from patient to patient. The design of existing flexible fixation devices are not well suited to provide varying levels of flexibility to provide optimum results for each individual candidate. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 5,672,175 discloses a flexible spinal fixation device which utilizes a flexible rod made of metal alloy and/or a composite material. Additionally, compression or extension springs are coiled around the rod for the purpose of providing de-rotation forces on the vertebrae in a desired direction. However, this patent is primarily concerned with providing a spinal fixation device that permits “relative longitudinal translational sliding movement along [the] vertical axis” of the spine and neither teaches nor suggests any particular designs of connection units (e.g., rods or plates) that can provide various flexibility characteristics. Prior flexible rods such as that mentioned in U.S. Pat. No. 5,672,175 typically have solid construction with a relatively small diameter in order to provide a desired level of flexibility. Because they are typically very thin to provide suitable flexibility, such prior art rods are prone to mechanical failure and have been known to break after implantation in patients.
Therefore, conventional spinal fixation devices have not provided a comprehensive and balanced solution to the problems associated with curing spinal diseases. Many of the prior devices are characterized by excessive rigidity, which leads to the problems discussed above while others, though providing some flexibility, are not well-adapted to provide varying degrees of flexibility. Additionally, existing flexible fixation devices utilize non-metallic components that are not proven to provide long-term stability and durability. Therefore, there is a need for an improved dynamic spinal fixation device that provides a desired level of flexibility to the injured parts of the spinal column, while also providing long-term durability and consistent stabilization of the spinal column.
Additionally, in a conventional surgical method for fixing the spinal fixation device to the spinal column, a doctor incises the midline of the back to about 10-15 centimeters, and then, dissects and retracts it to both sides. In this way, the doctor performs muscular dissection to expose the outer part of the facet joint. Next, after the dissection, the doctor finds an entrance point to the spinal pedicle using radiographic devices (e.g., C-arm flouroscopy), and inserts securing members of the spinal fixation device (referred to as “spinal pedicle screws”) into the spinal pedicle. Thereafter, the connection units (e.g., rods or plates) are attached to the upper portions of the pedicle screws in order to provide support and stability to the injured portion of the spinal column. Thus, in conventional spinal fixation procedures, the patient's back is incised about 10˜15 cm, and as a result, the back muscle, which is important for maintaining the spinal column, is incised or injured, resulting in significant post-operative pain to the patient and a slow recovery period.
Recently, to reduce patient trauma, a minimally invasive surgical procedure has been developed which is capable of performing spinal fixation surgery through a relatively small hole or “window” that is created in the patient's back at the location of the surgical procedure.
Through the use of an endoscope, or microscope, minimally invasive surgery allows a much smaller incision of the patient's affected area. Through this smaller incision, two or more securing members (e.g., pedicle screws) of the spinal fixation device are screwed into respective spinal pedicle areas using a navigation system. Thereafter, special tools are used to connect the stabilizing members (e.g., rods or plates) of the fixation device to the securing members. Alternatively, or additionally, the surgical procedure may include inserting a step dilator into the incision and then gradually increasing the diameter of the dilator. Thereafter, a tubular retractor is inserted into the dilated area to retract the patient's muscle and provide a visual field for surgery. After establishing this visual field, decompression and, if desired, fusion procedures may be performed, followed by a fixation procedure, which includes the steps of finding the position of the spinal pedicle, inserting pedicle screws into the spinal pedicle, using an endoscope or a microscope, and securing the stabilization members (e.g., rods or plates) to the pedicle screws in order to stabilize and support the weakened spinal column.
One of the most challenging aspects of performing the minimally invasive spinal fixation procedure is locating the entry point for the pedicle screw under endoscopic or microscopic visualization. Usually anatomical landmarks and/or radiographic devices are used to find the entry point, but clear anatomical relationships are often difficult to identify due to the confined working space. Additionally, the minimally invasive procedure requires that a significant amount of the soft tissue must be removed to reveal the anatomy of the regions for pedicle screw insertion. The removal of this soft tissue results in bleeding in the affected area, thereby adding to the difficulty of finding the correct position to insert the securing members and causing damage to the muscles and soft tissue surrounding the surgical area. Furthermore, because it is difficult to accurately locate the point of insertion for the securing members, conventional procedures are unnecessarily traumatic.
Radiography techniques have been proposed and implemented in an attempt to more accurately and quickly find the position of the spinal pedicle in which the securing members will be inserted. However, it is often difficult to obtain clear images required for finding the corresponding position of the spinal pedicle using radiography techniques due to radiographic interference caused by metallic tools and equipment used during the surgical operation. Moreover, reading and interpreting radiographic images is a complex task requiring significant training and expertise. Radiography poses a further problem in that the patient is exposed to significant amounts of radiation.
Although some guidance systems have been developed which guide the insertion of a pedicle screw to the desired entry point on the spinal pedicle, these prior systems have proven difficult to use and, furthermore, hinder the operation procedure. For example, prior guidance systems for pedicle screw insertion utilize a long wire that is inserted through a guide tube that is inserted through a patient's back muscle and tissue. The location of insertion of the guide tube is determined by radiographic means (e.g., C-arm flouroscope) and driven until a first end of the guide tube reaches the desired location on the surface of the pedicle bone. Thereafter, a first end of the guide wire, typically made of a biocompatible metal material, is inserted into the guide tube and pushed into the pedicle bone, while the opposite end of the wire remains protruding out of the patient's back. After the guide wire has been fixed into the pedicle bone, the guide tube is removed, and a hole centered around the guide wire is dilated and retracted. Finally, a pedicle screw having an axial hole or channel configured to receive the guide wire therethrough is guided by the guide wire to the desired location on the pedicle bone, where the pedicle screw is screw-driven into the pedicle.
Although the concept of the wire guidance system is a good one, in practice, the guide wire has been very difficult to use. Because it is a relatively long and thin wire, the structural integrity of the guide wire often fails during attempts to drive one end of the wire into the pedicle bone, making the process unnecessarily time-consuming and laborious. Furthermore, because the wire bends and crimps during insertion, it does not provide a smooth and secure anchor for guiding subsequent tooling and pedicle screws to the entry point on the pedicle. Furthermore, current percutaneous wire guiding systems are used in conjunction with C-arm flouroscopy (or other radiographic device) without direct visualization with the use of an endoscope or microscope. Thus, current wire guidance systems pose a potential risk of misplacement or pedicle breakage. Finally, because one end of the wire remains protruding out of the head of the pedicle screw, and the patient's back, this wire hinders freedom of motion by the surgeon in performing the various subsequent procedures involved in spinal fixation surgery. Thus, there is a need to provide an improved guidance system, adaptable for use in minimally invasive pedicle screw fixation procedures under endoscopic or microscopic visualization, which is easier to implant into the spinal pedicle and will not hinder subsequent procedures performed by the surgeon.
As discussed above, existing methods and devices used to cure spinal diseases are in need of much improvement. Most conventional spinal fixation devices are too rigid and inflexible. This excessive rigidity causes further abnormalities and diseases of the spine, as well as significant discomfort to the patient. Although some existing spinal fixation devices do provide some level of flexibility, these devices are not designed or manufactured so that varying levels of flexibility may be easily obtained to provide a desired level of flexibility for each particular patient. Additionally, prior art devices having flexible connection units (e.g., rods or plates) pose a greater risk of mechanical failure and do not provide long-term durability and stabilization of the spine. Furthermore, existing methods of performing the spinal fixation procedure are unnecessarily traumatic to the patient due to the difficulty in finding the precise location of the spinal pedicle or sacral of the backbone where the spinal fixation device will be secured.
The invention addresses the above and other needs by providing an improved method and system for stabilizing an injured or weakened spinal column.
To overcome the deficiencies of conventional spinal fixation devices, in one embodiment, the inventor of the present invention has invented a novel flexible spinal fixation device with an improved construction and design that uses metal or metal-synthetic hybrid components to provide a desired level of flexibility, stability and durability.
As a result of long-term studies to reduce the operation time required for minimally invasive spinal surgery, to minimize injury to tissues near the surgical area, in another embodiment, the invention provides a method and device for accurately and quickly finding a position of the spinal column in which securing members of the spinal fixation device will be inserted. A novel guidance/marking device is used to indicate the position in the spinal column where the securing members will be inserted.
The invention is described in detail below with reference to the figures wherein like elements are referenced with like numerals throughout.
As described above, the spinal fixation device is used for surgical treatment of spinal diseases by mounting securing members 2 at desired positions in the spinal column. In one embodiment, the rod 4 extends across two or more vertebrae of the spinal column and is secured by the securing members 2 so as to stabilize movement of the two or more vertebrae.
As shown in
In one embodiment, the rod 4 is designed to have a flexibility that substantially equals that of a normal back. Flexibility ranges for a normal back are known by those skilled in the art, and one of ordinary skill can easily determine a thickness and material of the tubular walls 5 and a width and density of the grooves 6 to achieve a desired flexibility or flexibility range within the range for a normal back. When referring to the grooves 6 herein, the term “density” refers to tightness of the spiral grooves 6 or, in other words, the distance between adjacent groove lines 6 as shown in
Additional designs and materials used to create a flexible tubular rod 4 or flexible middle portion 8 are described below with respect to
As shown in
As shown in
The fiducial pins 110, 112 are preferably made of a durable and rigid biocompatible metal (e.g., stainless steel, iron steel, titanium, titanium alloy) for easy insertion into the pedicle bone. In contrast to prior art guide wires, because of its comparatively shorter length and more rigid construction, the fiducial pins 110, 112 are easily driven into the spinal pedicle without risk of bending or structural failure. As explained above, the process of driving in prior art guidance wires was often very difficult and time-consuming. The insertion of the fiducial pins 110, 112 into the entry point on the spinal pedicle is much easier and convenient for the surgeon and, furthermore, does not hinder subsequent procedures due to a guide wire protruding out of the patient's back.
After the fiducial pins 110 or 112 have been inserted into the spinal pedicle as discussed above, in one embodiment, a larger hole or area centered around each pin 110, 112 is created to allow easer insertion and mounting of a pedicle screw 2 into the pedicle bone. The larger hole is created using a cannulated awl 122 as shown in
After the cannulated awl 122 has created a larger insertion hole for the pedicle screw 2, in one embodiment, the fiducial pin 110, 112 is removed. As discussed above, if the fiducial pin 112 has been used, a retrieving device 140 may be used to remove the fiducial pin 112 before implantation of a pedicle screw 2. As shown in
In alternate embodiments, the fiducial pins 110, 112 are not extracted from the spinal pedicle. Instead, a specially designed pedicle screw 144 may be inserted into the spinal pedicle over the pin 110, 112 without prior removal of the pin 110, 112. As shown in
Various embodiments of the invention have been described above. However, those of ordinary skill in the art will appreciate that the above descriptions of the preferred embodiments are exemplary only and that the invention may be practiced with modifications or variations of the devices and techniques disclosed above. Those of ordinary skill in the art will know, or be able to ascertain using no more than routine experimentation, many equivalents to the specific embodiments of the invention described herein. Such modifications, variations and equivalents are contemplated to be within the spirit and scope of the present invention as set forth in the claims below.
Number | Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
2003-0066108 | Sep 2003 | KR | national |
The present application is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 10/728,566, entitled “A Method And Apparatus For Flexible Fixation Of A Spine,” filed Dec. 5, 2003, which claims the benefit of priority under 35 U.S.C. §119(a) to Korean Application Ser. No. 2003-0066108, entitled “Dynamic Spinal Fixation Device,” filed on. Sep. 24, 2003, the entirety of which is incorporated by reference herein.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
1276117 | Riebe | Aug 1918 | A |
1985427 | Richardson | Dec 1934 | A |
2134197 | Miller | Oct 1938 | A |
2379577 | Harsted | Jul 1945 | A |
2546026 | Coon | Mar 1951 | A |
2554708 | Kosten | May 1951 | A |
2805441 | Reder | Sep 1957 | A |
2845748 | Derham | Aug 1958 | A |
2895594 | Smith | Jul 1959 | A |
2995151 | Lockwood | Aug 1961 | A |
3019552 | Schleich | Feb 1962 | A |
3028291 | Roberts et al. | Apr 1962 | A |
3263949 | Conrad | Aug 1966 | A |
3325327 | Swan | Jun 1967 | A |
3364807 | Holton | Jan 1968 | A |
3401607 | Wortman | Sep 1968 | A |
3463148 | Treace | Aug 1969 | A |
3575194 | McMurry | Apr 1971 | A |
3575195 | Alfieri | Apr 1971 | A |
3635233 | Robertson | Jan 1972 | A |
3669133 | Hyman | Jun 1972 | A |
3715454 | Kleykamp | Feb 1973 | A |
3741205 | Markolf | Jun 1973 | A |
3744488 | Cox | Jul 1973 | A |
3858578 | Milo | Jan 1975 | A |
3996834 | Reynolds | Dec 1976 | A |
3999730 | Consalves et al. | Dec 1976 | A |
4041939 | Hall | Aug 1977 | A |
4047523 | Hall | Sep 1977 | A |
4301551 | Dore et al. | Nov 1981 | A |
4338926 | Kummer et al. | Jul 1982 | A |
4369769 | Edwards | Jan 1983 | A |
4378712 | Yoshifuji | Apr 1983 | A |
4409968 | Drummond | Oct 1983 | A |
4422451 | Kalamchi | Dec 1983 | A |
4448191 | Rodnyansky et al. | May 1984 | A |
4483562 | Schoolman | Nov 1984 | A |
4493317 | Klaue | Jan 1985 | A |
4573448 | Kambin | Mar 1986 | A |
RE32650 | Waddell | Apr 1988 | E |
4743260 | Burton | May 1988 | A |
4748260 | Marlett | May 1988 | A |
4773402 | Asher et al. | Sep 1988 | A |
4911346 | Shallman | Mar 1990 | A |
4932975 | Main et al. | Jun 1990 | A |
4949927 | Madocks et al. | Aug 1990 | A |
4960410 | Pinchuk | Oct 1990 | A |
4979531 | Toor et al. | Dec 1990 | A |
5002576 | Fuhrmann et al. | Mar 1991 | A |
5011497 | Persson et al. | Apr 1991 | A |
5029847 | Ross | Jul 1991 | A |
5030220 | Howland | Jul 1991 | A |
5055104 | Ray | Oct 1991 | A |
5084048 | Jacob et al. | Jan 1992 | A |
5092867 | Harms et al. | Mar 1992 | A |
5133716 | Plaza | Jul 1992 | A |
5147361 | Ojima et al. | Sep 1992 | A |
5180393 | Commarmond | Jan 1993 | A |
5194678 | Kramer | Mar 1993 | A |
5215338 | Kimura et al. | Jun 1993 | A |
5246442 | Ashman et al. | Sep 1993 | A |
5251611 | Zehel et al. | Oct 1993 | A |
5261908 | Campbell | Nov 1993 | A |
5282863 | Burton | Feb 1994 | A |
5306275 | Bryan | Apr 1994 | A |
5353843 | Hoag | Oct 1994 | A |
5375823 | Navas | Dec 1994 | A |
5387213 | Breard et al. | Feb 1995 | A |
5413576 | Rivard | May 1995 | A |
5415661 | Holmes | May 1995 | A |
5423816 | Lin | Jun 1995 | A |
5423820 | Miller et al. | Jun 1995 | A |
5445471 | Wexler et al. | Aug 1995 | A |
5468241 | Metz-Stavenhagen et al. | Nov 1995 | A |
5480401 | Navas | Jan 1996 | A |
5486174 | Fournet-Fayard et al. | Jan 1996 | A |
5488761 | Leone | Feb 1996 | A |
5507812 | Moore | Apr 1996 | A |
5534032 | Hodorek | Jul 1996 | A |
5536268 | Griss | Jul 1996 | A |
5540688 | Navas | Jul 1996 | A |
5558674 | Heggeness et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5562660 | Grob | Oct 1996 | A |
5562737 | Graf | Oct 1996 | A |
5573520 | Schwartz et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
5601553 | Trebing et al. | Feb 1997 | A |
5607428 | Lin | Mar 1997 | A |
5620445 | Brosnahan et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
5649925 | Barbera Alacreu | Jul 1997 | A |
5658286 | Sava | Aug 1997 | A |
5662300 | Michelson | Sep 1997 | A |
5662651 | Tornier et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5665092 | Mangiardi et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5672175 | Martin | Sep 1997 | A |
5681311 | Foley et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
5688275 | Koros et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
5709686 | Talos et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5713900 | Benzel et al. | Feb 1998 | A |
5725582 | Bevan et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5733284 | Martin | Mar 1998 | A |
5785713 | Jobe | Jul 1998 | A |
5810306 | Hung et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5810823 | Klaue et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5814046 | Hopf | Sep 1998 | A |
RE36221 | Breard et al. | Jun 1999 | E |
5938663 | Petreto | Aug 1999 | A |
5944719 | Leban | Aug 1999 | A |
5961524 | Crombie | Oct 1999 | A |
5964767 | Tapia et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
6010162 | Grau et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6015409 | Jackson | Jan 2000 | A |
6030162 | Huebner | Feb 2000 | A |
6053922 | Krause et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6099528 | Saurat | Aug 2000 | A |
6102912 | Cazin et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6162223 | Orsak et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6175758 | Kambin | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6187000 | Davison et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6193720 | Yuan et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6203437 | Durie et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6206881 | Frigg et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6241730 | Alby | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6267764 | Elberg | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6290700 | Schmotzer | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6293949 | Justis et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6296644 | Saurat et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6328047 | Lee | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6337142 | Harder et al. | Jan 2002 | B2 |
6342055 | Eisermann et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6355038 | Pisharodi | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6402750 | Atkinson et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6440169 | Elberg et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6447518 | Krause et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6447546 | Bramlet et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6468278 | Muckter | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6468279 | Reo | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6475220 | Whiteside | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6475242 | Bramlet | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6488682 | Kikuchi et al. | Dec 2002 | B2 |
6520495 | La Mendola | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6530929 | Justis et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6530934 | Jacobsen et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6554831 | Rivard et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6558390 | Cragg | May 2003 | B2 |
6575979 | Cragg | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6576018 | Holt | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6585769 | Muhanna et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6589246 | Hack et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6596008 | Kambin | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6626905 | Schmiel et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6626909 | Chin | Sep 2003 | B2 |
6645207 | Dixon et al. | Nov 2003 | B2 |
6652585 | Lange | Nov 2003 | B2 |
6682533 | Dinsdale et al. | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6706044 | Kuslich et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6749614 | Teitelbaum et al. | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6783527 | Drewry et al. | Aug 2004 | B2 |
6821277 | Teitelbaum | Nov 2004 | B2 |
6827743 | Eisermann et al. | Dec 2004 | B2 |
6835205 | Atkinson et al. | Dec 2004 | B2 |
6884241 | Bertranou et al. | Apr 2005 | B2 |
6966910 | Ritland | Nov 2005 | B2 |
6974461 | Wolter | Dec 2005 | B1 |
6986771 | Paul et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
6989011 | Paul et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
RE38983 | Antonious | Feb 2006 | E |
6996910 | Liao | Feb 2006 | B2 |
7083621 | Shaolian et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7094237 | Gradel et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7097648 | Globerman et al. | Aug 2006 | B1 |
7125410 | Freudiger | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7137985 | Jahng | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7229441 | Trieu et al. | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7326210 | Jahng et al. | Feb 2008 | B2 |
7329258 | Studer | Feb 2008 | B2 |
7335200 | Carli | Feb 2008 | B2 |
7377921 | Studer et al. | May 2008 | B2 |
7556639 | Rothman et al. | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7611518 | Walder et al. | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7621912 | Harms et al. | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7651515 | Mack et al. | Jan 2010 | B2 |
7717941 | Petit | May 2010 | B2 |
7763052 | Jahng | Jul 2010 | B2 |
7815665 | Jahng et al. | Oct 2010 | B2 |
7993370 | Jahng | Aug 2011 | B2 |
8231657 | Eckhardt et al. | Jul 2012 | B2 |
8292925 | Hestad et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8623057 | Jahng et al. | Jan 2014 | B2 |
20010020169 | Metz-Stavenhagen | Sep 2001 | A1 |
20010037111 | Dixon et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20010049559 | Koo et al. | Dec 2001 | A1 |
20020010467 | Cooper et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020035366 | Walder et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020049394 | Roy et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020055740 | Lieberman | May 2002 | A1 |
20020065557 | Goble et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020082600 | Shaolian et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020087159 | Thomas | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020095154 | Atkinson et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020099378 | Michelson | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020107570 | Sybert et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020111628 | Ralph et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020111630 | Ralph et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020120270 | Trieu et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020123668 | Ritland | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020123750 | Eisermann et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020123806 | Reiley | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020133155 | Ferree | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020138077 | Ferree | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020143329 | Serhan et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020143401 | Michelson | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020169450 | Lange | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020183748 | Martin et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20020198526 | Shaolian et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030032958 | Soubeiran | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030040746 | Mitchell et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030040797 | Fallin et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030045875 | Bertranou et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030055426 | Carbone et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030060823 | Bryan | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030073998 | Pagliuca et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030083657 | Drewry et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030083688 | Simonson | May 2003 | A1 |
20030088251 | Braun et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030093078 | Ritland | May 2003 | A1 |
20030109880 | Shirado et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030171749 | Le Couedic et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030191371 | Smith et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030191470 | Ritland | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030195514 | Trieu et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030195551 | Davison et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030220643 | Ferree | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20040002708 | Ritland | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040049189 | Le Couedic et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040049190 | Biedermann et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040049489 | Yabe | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040138661 | Bailey | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040138662 | Landry et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040143264 | McAfee | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040147928 | Landry et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040172025 | Drewry et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040215191 | Kitchen | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040215193 | Shaolian et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040236327 | Paul et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20040236328 | Paul et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20040236329 | Panjabi | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20040267260 | Mack et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050021029 | Trieu et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050033295 | Wisnewski | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050033299 | Shluzas | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050038432 | Shaolian et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050049708 | Atkinson et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050059976 | Bryan et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050065514 | Studer | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050065516 | Jahng | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050085815 | Harms et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050090822 | DiPoto | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050101957 | Buskirk et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050113927 | Malek | May 2005 | A1 |
20050124991 | Jahng | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050131407 | Sicvol et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050149020 | Jahng et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050154390 | Biedermann et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050165396 | Fortin et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050171539 | Braun et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050171540 | Lim et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050171543 | Timm et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050177156 | Timm et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050177157 | Jahng | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050182401 | Timm et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050182409 | Callahan et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050197660 | Haid et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050203511 | Wilson-MacDonald et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050203513 | Jahng et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050203514 | Jahng et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050203517 | Jahng et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050203519 | Harms et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050222569 | Panjabi | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050228381 | Kirschman | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050245930 | Timm et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050261682 | Ferree | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050261685 | Fortin et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050261686 | Paul | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050277922 | Trieu et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050288670 | Panjabi et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050288672 | Ferree | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060009768 | Ritland | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060015100 | Panjabi et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060036240 | Colleran et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060084982 | Kim | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060084984 | Kim | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060111715 | Jackson | May 2006 | A1 |
20060129147 | Biedermann et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060142758 | Petit | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060142760 | McDonnell | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060149228 | Schlapfer et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060149238 | Sherman et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060189983 | Fallin et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060189984 | Fallin et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060195093 | Jahng et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060212033 | Rothman et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060229612 | Rothman et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060240533 | Sengupta et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060260483 | Hartmann et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060264940 | Hartmann | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060293657 | Hartmann | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070016193 | Ritland | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070055247 | Jahng et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070073293 | Martz et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070118122 | Butler et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070123864 | Walder et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070129729 | Petit et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070149909 | Fortin et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070198088 | Biedermann et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070206244 | Kobayashi et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070225710 | Jahng et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070276380 | Jahng et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20080195149 | Burke | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20090076553 | Wolter | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20100137919 | Wolter | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20110106167 | Jahng | May 2011 | A1 |
20110301643 | Jahng | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20120209330 | Jahng | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20140094852 | Jahng | Apr 2014 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2600672 | Sep 2006 | CA |
675531 | Oct 1992 | CH |
2821678 | Nov 1979 | DE |
4109941 | Oct 1992 | DE |
4239716 | Aug 1994 | DE |
4343117 | Jun 1995 | DE |
19629011 | Jan 1998 | DE |
197 46 687 | May 1999 | DE |
10348329 | Feb 2005 | DE |
266146 | May 1988 | EP |
0553042 | Jul 1993 | EP |
669109 | Aug 1995 | EP |
0669109 | Aug 1995 | EP |
677277 | Oct 1995 | EP |
0677277 | Oct 1995 | EP |
1281364 | Feb 2003 | EP |
1488751 | Dec 2004 | EP |
1 677 689 | Jul 2006 | EP |
742618 | Mar 1933 | FR |
2694182 | Feb 1994 | FR |
2702363 | Sep 1994 | FR |
2 715 825 | Aug 1995 | FR |
2717370 | Sep 1995 | FR |
2718946 | Oct 1995 | FR |
2728158 | Jun 1996 | FR |
2775583 | Sep 1999 | FR |
2799949 | Apr 2001 | FR |
2802796 | Jun 2001 | FR |
1237405 | Jun 1971 | GB |
1575194 | Sep 1980 | GB |
2382304 | May 2003 | GB |
07-008504 | Jan 1995 | JP |
9-1082477 | Apr 1997 | JP |
11290337 | Oct 1999 | JP |
2000325358 | Nov 2000 | JP |
2002224131 | Aug 2002 | JP |
WO9505785 | Mar 1995 | WO |
WO9709000 | Mar 1997 | WO |
WO0128436 | Apr 2001 | WO |
WO03047442 | Jun 2003 | WO |
WO2004017817 | Mar 2004 | WO |
WO2004069987 | Aug 2004 | WO |
WO 2004098452 | Nov 2004 | WO |
WO 2004105577 | Dec 2004 | WO |
WO2005030029 | Apr 2005 | WO |
WO2005030031 | Apr 2005 | WO |
WO 2005039454 | May 2005 | WO |
WO 2005044117 | May 2005 | WO |
WO 2005092222 | Oct 2005 | WO |
WO 2005094704 | Oct 2005 | WO |
WO 2005110257 | Nov 2005 | WO |
WO2006063107 | Jun 2006 | WO |
WO2006071742 | Jul 2006 | WO |
WO2006096414 | Sep 2006 | WO |
WO2008100944 | Aug 2008 | WO |
Entry |
---|
International Search Report for PCT/US04/30732, mailed on Oct. 14, 2005, 2 pages. |
International Search Report for PCT/US05/46659, mailed on Aug. 14, 2006, 3 pages. |
International Search Report for PCT/US05/44372, mailed on Sep. 20, 2006, 3 pages. |
Kanayama et al., Journal of Neurosurgery (2001) 95(Spine 1):5-10. |
Markwalder and Wenger, Acta Neurochirurgica (2003) 145(3):209-214. |
Mulholland and Sengupta, European Spine Journal (2002) 11 (Suppl 2):S198-205. |
Schmoelz et al., Joumal of Spinal Disorders & Techniques (2003) 16(4):418-423. |
Stoll et al., European Spine Journal (2002) 11 (Suppl 2):S170-178. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for PCT/US2005/044372, mailed Jun. 21, 2007, 4 pages. |
U.S. Appl. No. 10/997,165 to Tae-Ahn Jahng: Office Action dated Mar. 13, 2007. |
U.S. Appl. No. 10/997,165 to Tae-Ahn Jahng: Amendment dated Aug. 28, 2007. |
U.S. Appl. No. 10/997,165 to Tae-Ahn Jahng: Interview Summary dated Dec. 21, 2007. |
U.S. Appl. No. 10/997,165 to Tae-Ahn Jahng: Office Action dated Jan. 8, 2008. |
U.S. Appl. No. 10/997,165 to Tae-Ahn Jahng: Interview Summary dated Mar. 21, 2008. |
U.S. Appl. No. 10/997,165 to Tae-Ahn Jahng: Amendment dated May 7, 2008. |
U.S. Appl. No. 10/997,165 to Tae-Ahn Jahng: Office Action dated Aug. 7, 2008. |
U.S. Appl. No. 10/997,165 to Tae-Ahn Jahng: Interview Summary dated Sep. 25, 2008. |
U.S. Appl. No. 10/997,165 to Tae-Ahn Jahng: Amendment dated Sep. 22, 2008. |
U.S. Appl. No. 10/997,165 to Tae-Ahn Jahng: Office Action dated Sep. 1, 2009. |
Notice of Grounds for Rejection from corresponding Japanese Patent Application. |
European Patent Application No. EP 12 00 0069: Extended European Search Report dated Apr. 12, 2012, 6 pages. |
“Defendant Globus Medical, Inc.'s Invalidity Contentions”, In the United States District Courtfor the District of Delaware, Case No. 10-300-RMB, filed Apr. 26, 2011. |
International Search Report for PCT/US05/44372, mailed on Jun. 13 2007, 3 pages cited by other. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20070123871 A1 | May 2007 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 10728566 | Dec 2003 | US |
Child | 11650260 | US |