Today, microsurgical spinal bone resections and spinal decompressions which are performed under microscopic view through mini-open tubes and retractors are becoming the standard of spinal surgical care. These access tools normally have inner diameters between about 16 mm and 30 mm. Where, as here, the approach and decompression technique are familiar to spinal surgeons, and where standard equipment and instruments can be used, these known technologies should be considered as a base from which further innovation can be made.
However, the anatomic window of Kambin's triangle, through which safe disc access is possible, has very limited dimensions. This access window can be enlarged by resecting at least a part of the superior articular process. But either way, the length of a working shield needed to safely introduce the implant to the intervertebral space via this approach must be in the region of about 8-12 mm in diameter, reaching from the facet joint line to the disc entry point.
The present inventors envision introducing a second, inner shield through the above-mentioned first, outer shield. The second inner shield extends past the first outer shield to arrive next to nervous tissue, thereby shielding the nerves from instruments or devices passing through to the disc space. During this step, the outer shield allows the visual, safe placement of the inner shield.
In one embodiment, there is provided an outer shield (which can be, for example, a tube or a blade) comprising an access shield with a larger diameter (˜12-30 mm) that reaches from the skin down to the bone line, with an inner shield having a second smaller diameter (˜5-12 mm) extending past the access shield and reaches down to the disc level. This combines the benefits of the direct visual from microsurgical/mini open approaches and percutaneous techniques (
The outer shield has a number of features and advantages. First, it enables separation and protection of surrounding of soft tissue and visualization during a standard microsurgical decompression/bone resection work under microscopic view—based on a standard procedure that a surgeon who is familiar with MIS techniques is able to perform. Second, it enables separation and protection of surrounding of soft tissue and visualization during detection and removal of the facet joint, or parts of the facet joint—based on a standard procedure that a surgeon who is familiar with MIS technique is able to perform. Third, it enables identification, preparation and protection of sensitive (e.g., neural) tissue (exiting nerve root, traversing nerve root, dura) under direct visual control underneath the border between retraction-sensitive and non-retraction sensitive tissues (e.g., the facet line)—based on a standard procedure that a surgeon who is familiar with MIS technique is able to perform. Fourth, it enables insertion of the inner shield and potential docking of the inner shield in the disc space or at the vertebrae under direct visual control.
Likewise, the inner shield has a number of features and advantages. First, it enables protection of nervous tissue (exiting nerve root, transverse nerve root, dura) against instruments that are introduced into the intervertebral disc. Second, it enables guidance of intradiscal instrumentation (discectomy instruments, visualization instruments, discectomy verification instruments, implant insertion instruments, bone graft filling instruments). Third, because of its small size, the shield can be inserted with minimal damage or trauma to bone and soft tissue in the area of the posterior column of the spine, comparable to percutaneous access instruments
Therefore, in accordance with the present invention, there is provided a method of accessing an intervertebral disc in a patient, comprising the steps of:
Also in accordance with the present invention, there is provided a method of accessing an intervertebral disc in a patient, comprising the steps of:
Also in accordance with the present invention, there is provided an access device for accessing an intervertebral disc, comprising:
a-b show inner shield having proximal elbows.
b show a distraction embodiment.
a-b disclose various cross-sections of the template for guiding a bone cutting device.
Fluoroscopic visualization is performed to define the incision site of the initial reference array placement, as well as the incision for access to the intervertebral disc.
Generally, the shields of the present invention can be applied to any of the conventional approaches commonly used in spine surgery. However, given the clinical benefit of the access device and its underlying rationale, it is preferably suitable to use these shields in either interlaminar, extraforaminal or transforaminal approaches to the intervertebral disc.
Now referring to
In the design of the outer shield, traditional tube or split tube/retractor concepts can be used. Newer concepts such as a “flexible tube” could also be adopted. The outer shield can be a simple cylindrical tube. It may also be a split tube, in the manner that conventional retractors are considered to be split tubes. It can be a flexible tube. It can be a tube with a slot running from the proximal end to the distal end. Various shape embodiments could be:
In some embodiments, the shape of the distal end portion 5 includes an unsymmetrical shape for better tissue retraction lateral to the SAP.
The outer shield can be preferably used with a variety of access window sizes (i.e., widths) ranging from 6 mm to 25 mm and lengths ranging from 40 mm to 200 mm. Typically, the outer shield comprises a feature that allows for the attachment of a stabilization mechanism that allows for appropriate flexibility in attachment (e.g. a ball joint). In one embodiment, the outer shield has a customized feature adapted for the introduction of an endoscope or camera that allows the endoscope to be introduced to a predetermined depth where the working window at the distal portion of the outer shield can be visualized.
Inner Shield Embodiments:
Now referring to
In a first embodiment, the inner shield is a fully surrounding (i.e., extending for 360 degrees) stiff tube. It may possess various cross-sections, such as:
The inner shield may possess different longitudinal shapes. For example, in a second embodiment, and now referring to
In some embodiments, the inner shield may be in the form of one of a plurality of retractor blades.
In tubular embodiments, the smaller tube can be a concentric with the larger tube, or not concentric therewith. In
In some embodiments, there is provided a spherical joint between the larger and the smaller tubes, allowing the angle to change between the two tubes (
In some embodiments, the inner shield is a partially surrounding tube/shield, or “flange”, designed only to protect the nerves. For some applications, the only purpose of the inner tube might be to shield/protect the exiting nerve root. In this case, the inner shield might be simplified to a cylinder with a flange 25 extending distally therefrom, so that the flange is only a shield of about a quarter of a full circle. See
Depth Adjustment of Nerve Protector
The aforementioned outer shield can be positioned and fixed in its depth through a mechanism which relies on interference between the outer shield and the inner shield at any location along either the outer shield or inner shield.
In
In
Navigation of Outer Shield:
The first port allows the outer shield to be navigated to determine its position (depth and orientation) in relation to the treatment site. In one embodiment, the outer surface of the outer shield has a feature that allows for the direct or indirect attachment of a navigation instrument. In another embodiment, the inner surface of the outer shield has a feature that allows for the direct or indirect attachment of a navigation instrument.
Endoscope in the Outer Shield:
In some embodiments, the outer shield has an integrated endoscope that can be set in a fixed or variable (angle or circumferential) position relative to the anatomy. This endoscopic visualization can be utilized in subsequent surgical steps, including bone removal, inner shield deployment, discectomy and implant insertion. Preferably, the endoscope has an integrated lens cleaning mechanism for automated lens cleaning in situ.
Fixed Endoscope:
The endoscope can be a chip-on-tip type of endoscope having an outer diameter less than 5 mm and having an incremental length substantially matching the length of the outer shield. The benefits of an integrated chip-on-tip endoscope/outer shield embodiment include the relatively free space within the bore of the outer shield, thereby enhancing visualization.
Preferably, the endoscope is angled within the port or has a built-in lens angle such that, at final positioning within the port, the circumference of the distal portion of the outer shield is visible and the area within the circumference is visible as well.
In some embodiments, the endoscope can be removed from the wall of the outer shield and inserted independently into the outer shield bore to inspect the treatment site (e.g. into the disc space for confirmation of adequate discectomy).
Still referring to
Now referring to
There are a number of ways to fix or locate the inner shield onto the disc and/or onto the outer shield. In one embodiment, which provides safety of the inner shield against slippage/dislocation, involves mounting it distally (onto or within the vertebral endplates or disc annulus) and/or proximally (onto the outer shield).
Distal fixation of the inner shield with the anatomy may include: a) fixation within disc annulus, b) fixation against vertebrae; c) fixation against other structures; d) K-Wires that are distally extending through the walls of the inner shield and anchored to the anatomy; and e) spikes extending the distal part (
Proximal fixation of inner shield upon the outer shield may involve a positioning ring or a depth adjustment. Now referring to
Now referring to
Inner Shield Deployment (Circumferential):
Embodiments having separate outer and inner shields allow for the independent positioning of the inner shield relative to the outer shield. Also, the use of a smaller inner shield (relative to the outer shield) allows for maximum visualization at the entrance where no retraction-sensitive tissues reside. This maximum visualization allows for accurate placement of the inner shield. Where retraction-sensitive tissues reside distal the outer shield, a relatively smaller inner shield allows for minimum retraction while providing an access through or past these tissues. Preferably, the inner diameter of the inner shield is no more than 40-100% of the inner diameter of the outer shield.
In some embodiments, the inner shield-outer shield configuration is replaced by a) a primary shield having a substantially tubular shape having a cutout, and b) a secondary shield having a shape that is substantially insertable into the cutout. Preferably, the primary shield has a substantially annular shape and the secondary shield has an arcuate cross-section that substantially matches the annular shape of the primary shield. This embodiment allows the secondary shield to be tilted with respect to the primary shield.
Inner Shield Deployment (Radial):
In another nerve protection embodiment, the motion of retraction of the shields is radial rather than rotational. In these embodiments, a straight or bayonetted inner shield may be used. The inner shield may be positioned over the area in which the protected tissue is to be located. The flange shield can then be angled into the center of the access window at the distal end of the outer shield e.g. towards the caudal pedicle. It can then be subsequently advanced longitudinally onto the medial side of the nerve root, into the “safe zone” as described by Kambin. It is subsequently angled such that the distal tip of the inner shield is angled laterally, wherein its outer distal surface gently pushes the exiting nerve root away and I or shields it against the tools that are further introduced medially to the shield for intradiscal work. This embodiment may be constructed such that the inner shield substantially nests either a) within wall of the outer shield (
In other embodiments, an outer tube can have a retractor nesting with the outer face of the outer tube.
Depth Control of Nerve Protector:
The aforementioned outer shield can be controlled in its depth through a mechanism that relies on interference between the outer shield and the inner shield at any location along either the outer shield or inner shield.
There are a number of avenues by which the present device can be used to distract the disc space and/or provide nerve protection upon mounting.
In one distraction embodiment, a revolution spreader is used. This is a conventional concept involves an ovoid or rectangular cross-sectional shaped rod that is inserted into the disc with its smaller dimension directed towards the vertebral endplates. After turning the spreader by 90° under force, the larger dimension is directed towards the vertebral endplates, which distracts the disc by the difference of the two cross sectional dimensions.
In a second distraction embodiment, as now referring to
The spreader with respective cranial 61 and caudal 63 distraction blades in cranial and caudal locations is introduced into the disc in a collapsed/tapered configuration (
Now referring to
In a nerve protection embodiment, and now referring to
In a second nerve protection embodiment, and now referring to
In another nerve protection embodiment, a radially-retracting multi-shield is used to gently move and/or shield nerves. The radially-retracting principle can also be applied to more than one radially retracting shield.
A single shield may be suitable if the protection only has to be provided against a structure that lies on one single side. In other situations, however, the shield entry into the disc would be bounded both medially and laterally by the traversing and the exiting nerves, so that the inner shield needs to shield against two opposing structures. In this case, the two opposing inner flanges are initially positioned towards the center of the outer tube access window and subsequently retracted outwards to shield the opposing nerves from the tools that are further introduced for intradiscal work.
In one embodiment, and now referring to
In some embodiments, there is navigation of the probe to a facet capsule or disc space through Kambin's triangle. Preferably, subsequent to fascia and muscle dissection, a probe enabled with navigation visualization is introduced to achieve an initial anchoring point. In one embodiment, the probe is inserted into the disc space by being indexed off the lateral border of the superior articulating process and may be optionally enabled with/supported by a nerve detection and/or visualization function. In another embodiment, the probe is introduced into the facet capsule.
In some embodiments, there is dilation over a navigated probe. Subsequent to the initial anchoring point, dilation is performed to prepare the surgical site for the size of port required to perform the treatment. Sequential dilation up to the preferred size port window is then performed. The port is then introduced over the associated dilator. In one embodiment, the initial anchoring is in the disc space and concentric sequential dilation device(s) would be used in order to retract tissue concentrically around the initial anchoring point (exposing the lateral portion of the SAP on the lateral aspect and Kambin's triangle on the medial aspect). In another embodiment, the initial anchoring is in the facet capsule and eccentric sequential dilation device(s) could be used to focus tissue retraction laterally over the lateral portion of the SAP and Kambin's triangle.
In some embodiments, the outer shield is stabilized onto an anatomical reference. The outer sleeve has a substantially tubular portion having a point or feature designed for attachment to a stabilization mechanism, which in turn is fixed to an anatomical feature on the vertebral body either cranial or caudal to the treatment site.
In some embodiments, the outer sleeve is attached to a stabilization mechanism. In one embodiment, this stabilization device would be a device of sufficient length to reach an anatomical fixation point (e.g. pedicle screw) on the contralateral side of the treatment site. The mechanism (including its connection feature connecting to both the outer shield and the anatomical anchor) allows for sufficient flexibility of placement of the outer shield and sufficient stabilization to hold the outer shield in place until it is released by the user. The method of stabilization would be such that the user can dictate the degree of stiffness.
In another embodiment, this device has sufficient length to reach an anatomical fixation point (e.g. pedicle screw) on the ipsilateral side of the treatment site. Likewise, the mechanism (including its connection feature to both outer shield and anatomical anchor) would allow for sufficient flexibility of placement of the outer shield and sufficient stabilization to hold the outer shield in place until released by the user. The method of stabilization would be such that the user can dictate the degree of stiffness.
In another embodiment, this device would be a device of sufficient length to reach an anatomical fixation point (e.g. pedicle screw) on midline of the patient. Likewise, the mechanism (including its connection feature to both outer shield and anatomical anchor) would allow for sufficient flexibility of placement of the outer shield and sufficient stabilization to hold the outer shield in place unless released by the user. The method of stabilization would be such that the user can dictate the degree of stiffness.
Now referring to
Now referring to
In some embodiments, an alternative to angling the access channel medially from the incision site could be the use of an alternative access site that would be more medial. In some embodiments, the initial anchoring point in the disc space will be medial to the inferior articulating process. For the embodiment having an initial anchoring point in the facet capsule, the dilation of the eccentric dilators will be medial from the capsule. Also, portions of the lamina and the inferior articulating process will be removed through the bone removal segment.
Now referring to
Under either direct or endoscopic visualization, a bone removal device is introduced to the outer shield and utilized to remove at least the lateral portion of the SAP. Such a device is available in lengths and sizes allowing for its safe introduction and use through an access window from 40 mm to 200 mm and a window size from 10-25 mm.
In one embodiment, this bone removal device is an ultrasonic cutting device. In another embodiment, this bone removal device is a reciprocating cutting surface. In yet another embodiment, this bone removal device is a revolving cutting tool. In another embodiment, this bone removal device is a mechanical punch with a stroke length between 10-30 mm. Removal of the bone can be performed in such a manner that sizes smaller than the access size will be excised and removed. The bone removal can be performed with the use of a template independently inserted into the outer shield and used to guide the direction of bone cutting and removal.
A Negative Template is a plug-like device that is inserted in the outer Access Tube. It contains a longitudinal cut-out in different shapes, depending on the cross-sectional shape of the tissue that needs to be removed respective of the cross-sectional shape of the tissue that needs to be covered and therefore protected from any surgical interactions. By inserting a cutting device like e.g. a Milling Bit into the longitudinal cut-out the surgeon is able to remove the tissue without the risk of endangering the covered tissue/structures. In combination with a proximal stop-system (on proximal end of outer Access Tube and/or shaft of milling system) the surgeon can remove the tissue layer by layer. The layer thickness and therefore the progression of the cutting procedure can be controlled via the stop system supported by a scale. This system allows the surgeon to perform safe tissue removal with a controlled serial work flow: check anatomical situation→adjust stop system to define cross-sectional thickness of tissue that needs to be removed→insert milling system until the stop system is engaged→mill/cut tissue (also blindly) in plane (2D)→remove milling system→check anatomical situation→adjust stop system.
A serial workflow can be considered to be safer than a parallel workflow, since the surgeon only needs to take care of one parameter at a time (here: planar position of milling bit followed by its depth followed by planar position of milling bit . . . ) whereas a parallel workflow requires the control of two or more parameters at a time (here: planar position of milling bit in parallel to its depth).
Navigation of SAP Removal can be carried out with the aforementioned bone removal device adapted to be navigated through its mechanical or visual connection with a navigation system.
Now referring to
Now referring to
An alternative embodiment to the prescribed disc clearing step in
Now referring to
Now referring to
Viewing Element
In some embodiments, a visualization element based on the chip-on-tip technology and integrated into the wall of the port is used. This embodiment has a number of advantages over a standard rod-lens endoscope that is mounted at the tube wall:
In minimally invasive spine surgery conducted through portals, a set of dilators is often used to prepare the site for reception of the portal. One such technology is shown in US Patent Publication US 2012-0232552 (Morgenstern). In this conventional technology (which has eccentric dilators), the outer diameter of any one of the dilators is identical to the inner diameter of the next successive (outer) dilator. This identity of diameters is necessary for fluoroscopy assisted, percutaneous muscle dilation.
Since some embodiments of the present application describe a procedure between the level of the facet joint and the disc, the surgical site is dissected under direct visualization. Accordingly, the diameters of successive dilators used in these novel procedures do not have to match. Relaxation of the “exact diameter” requirement in these novel procedures allows the surgeon freedom in many tube design areas. For example, it allows the use of tubes that are tapered. It also allows the surgeon the freedom to use outer and inner ports that are not coaxial. It further allows the trajectories of the inner port relative to the outer port to vary in angulation within certain treatment steps. Lastly, it allows the trajectories of the inner port relative to the outer port to vary in distance within certain treatment steps.
Because fluoroscopy-assisted, percutaneous muscle dilation is carried out without direct visualization, it is a blind procedure whose use has limitations. These limitations include the inability to carry out surgical steps that require direct visualization out of safety considerations. One such treatment step requiring direct visualization is direct decompression of bony and ligamentous tissue that is directly adjacent to nerve structures. Since this decompression is a common step performed on degenerated spinal motion segments during a spinal fusion, the Morgenstern procedure severely limits the pathologies/indications that can be treated.
Because some embodiments described herein allow for direct visualization of delicate anatomical structures, those embodiments further specifically allow direct decompression of bony and ligamentous tissue that is directly adjacent to nerve structures and more generally allow manipulation or removal of tissue adjacent the tubes through a very tissue-preserving “tube-in-tube” access port.
Morgenstern further describes a method in which a guide wire is directly introduced through the disc space to Kambin's triangle, under fluoroscopy guidance (i.e., no direct visualization). This is a well known approach, but still requires inserting a guidewire past nerve structures without direct visualization. Morgenstern further describes the possibility of using electrically-based nerve monitoring probes. Moreover Morgenstern describes a method of enlarging the spinous process by subsequently rasping away bone from the SAP and the pedicle. Such a procedure might weaken the base of the pedicle, which makes it risky to combine this method with pedicle screw constructs.
The novel procedures described herein only perform non-visualized procedures (e.g., dilation) in a safe zone above the facet line. In the anatomically more critical zone between the level of the facet joint and the disc, the novel procedures dissect the surgical site under direct visualization, thereby allowing the surgeon to spare as much of the bone as is possible and as is meaningful.
Navigation
Navigation enhances static x-ray, CT or MRI data by intra-operatively showing in real-time, where the instruments used actually are in relation to the anatomy of the patient. Therefore it increases the safety of those instruments by showing their shape, trajectory and positioning and even more importantly it supports the surgeon to keep instrument orientation during the performed manipulations.
Without wishing to be tied to a theory, it is believed that one reason why minimally invasive techniques are not often used is the significantly higher x-ray exposure needed to keep orientation in comparison to mini-open techniques, where the surgeon still has direct visualization and so can actually see the active site with a microscope or loupe. The x-ray exposure is an even greater for the surgeon who is exposed to the radiation on a frequent basis. This challenge is addressed by the implementation of navigation technology in the novel procedures described herein because they allow the reduction of x-ray exposure to an ideal minimal total of two x-rays for registration purposes. Once a single lateral shot and a single anterior-posterior shot have been registered, all used instruments (e.g. Jamshidi-Needle, Pointer, Dilatators, Access Tube, Osteotome, Expandable Cage itself, Disc Removal Device, . . . ) can be projected in these static fluoro-images in real time. Another positive effect is a significant savings of time. Having the navigation system in place also helps the surgeon to understand the orientation (trajectory and depth) of the endoscope and therefore to understand what he or she actually sees with the camera. This can either be achieved by navigating the camera directly or indirectly by setting the camera in a fixed position integrated into a navigated Access Tube.
The Jamshidi-Needle, Pointer, Dilatators, and Access Tube Instruments can all be navigated with only one Instrument, the FOX-Navigation-Multi-Tool.
Bone Cutter
In some embodiments, the novel procedures use an Ultrasonic Bone Cutting device for SAP removal, which specifically cuts bone only and will not cut soft tissue. Embodiments based on a conventional Expandable Cage Device for interbody fusion may require an access window at least as large as 12 mm. Such a large window can only be achieved by (partly) removing the Superior Articulation Process (SAP) to extend the Kambin's Triangle. The Ultrasonic Bone Cutting Device adds significantly to the safety of this procedure since it does not cut nerves if accidently hit. If the cutting device blade is designed to be in the shape and diameter of the Inner Tube/Blade (i.e., a Cookie Cutter design) that approaches distally down to the level of the disc space, the SAP removal can be minimized (less trauma, less stress for patient, quicker recovery) and performed in a single step (faster than multiple step procedure).
Another option to increase the safety of bone cutting is a depth-controlled manual milling of the bone with a negative guide. The negative guide covers those areas that will not be removed (negative template). The depth control allows the milling of the bone layer by level, under serial control of the surgeon. The reference for the depth control as well as the trajectory can be the outer Access Tube (also see paragraph navigation).
a-b disclose various cross-sections of the template for guiding a bone cutting device.
Bone Cutter
In some embodiments, the bone removal device is a harmonic scalpel having a cookie cutter design. The scalpel has a crescent-shaped cutting surface that interfaces with the outer tube. The scalpel is used as a single pass instrument, removing a predetermined amount of bone in a single pass. In some embodiments, the scalpel also has a tube that sprays water for irrigation, while the outer tube has a suction line for clearing the slurry of removed bone.
In some embodiments, the scalpel can be navigated and ride down a slot provided in the inside wall of the outer tube. The slot depth can be predetermined to provide depth-controlled milling, and to control where cutter goes. This is advantageous because it is believed that freehand cutting hits the nerves too easily. The shape and size of the cutting surface can define the specific area of bone to be removed. The specificity of cut is advantageous because it minimizes the amount of bone removal, which is beneficial in the highly enervated facet. Thus, a quicker procedure, less trauma (less pain), and more stable construct is realized.
Viewing Element (Olive)
In some embodiments, the chip viewing element can be angulated so it can see around a corner of the tube,
In conventional-endoscope, visualization is 2D (ie., no depth perception), and so two nerves may look close together when they are actually 2 cm apart. Thus, in some embodiments, the endoscope is modified so that the chip acts like a range finder. In particular, the chip identifies and assesses a reference feature that is a known distance from chip, and then measures how far away a nerve is from chip (which is the tube end) based on that assessment.
Nerve Deflection (Tube in Tube)
In some embodiments, the outer shield has a pressure sensor thereon to measure the stress on the nerve. Using ultrasound techniques that can measure distance, the system can measure the elongation of nerve under retraction and define a maximum elongation limit (e.g., 20%), and then warn the surgeon if the elongation limit is exceeded. In some embodiments, the system integrates ultrasound into the port and thereby navigates the port.
In some embodiments, the surgeon navigates the camera. This allows the surgeon to understand orientation of the camera.
In some embodiments, visualization provides an axial view of the disc, so the surgeon can understand the location of the disc removal tool.
Neuromonitoring Analytics
Currently, neuromonitoring devices can be used to obtain an indication of potential nerve health or nerve damage, which may be induced in a surgical setting. This indication of nerve health is achieved by measuring electrical impulses between a nerve near a surgical site and a far end of the nerve. For example, impulses may be measured between a nerve root at the spine and some point found on the legs.
Nerve damage can be caused through direct manual contact with a nerve. Apart from gross damage such as severing or crushing the nerve, other lesser forces imparted on the nerve can also cause damage. For example, displacing the nerve, stretching it, or compressing it can cause significant damage. In some cases, extended application of such forces to the nerve can reduce blood flow through the nerve, again causing nerve damage. Often times, this exposure time is dependent on the amount of force applied. Accordingly, there appears to be no known steadfast rule as to how long the surgeon may be able to load a nerve.
Alternate forms of evaluating potential nerve damage besides neuromonitoring may bring new insights into nerve protection during a procedure. In this regard, nerve manipulation measurement could yield an indication of risk to the nerve. If a nerve is displaced for the procedure, it may be elongated or it may be displaced laterally. These alterations in the nerve's physical features could be measured and use to predict potential nerve damage. Accordingly, other potential features could be measured and use to predict potential nerve damage include arc length and the diameter of the nerve itself etc. These features may be measured in quantifiable terms via techniques such as ultrasound. The resulting measurements are and then analyzed (via software or manually) in terms of absolute value, percent change or some other metric indicative of potential nerve risk/damage that can be obtained from a database or library. In some embodiments, these metrics can be used as predictors of the safe length of time that a nerve can have a given displacement or deformation without causing long term damage. Calculation or algorithms can also be used to determine a maximum safe deformation, or a maximum allowable time during which a nerve can have a given deformed feature.
This measurement could be obtained in many ways. It can be measured manually, optically or through some other form of imaging. This could occur in an open procedure, subcutaneously in an MIS or other type of procedure. Direct visualization could be completed with the use of a camera. Before and after images could be interpreted to calculate the amount of absolute deformation or percent change. The measurements can be obtained through modalities such as ultrasound, or other forms of imaging that can “see” soft tissue or identify nerve tissue relative to the surrounding tissue (X-ray, CAT/PET scan, MRI etc).
Other measurement methods that can be used in accordance with this embodiment may include a) measurement of density change within the nerve due to loading, or b) change in blood flow. Such measurements can be obtained through radar, ultrasound and other imaging methods.
In some neuromonitoring embodiments, it may be possible to measure impedance within the nerve or impulses, wherein this may be done locally relative to the specific deformation area of the nerve. In particular, in some embodiments discussed herein, the nerve shield could have a sensor on opposite edges of the shield that would contact the same nerve in two different nerve locations. These sensors would allow the surgeon to read electrical values such as impulses or resistance, before nerve distention and then measure it again as distention occurs or is achieved. The difference in these measured values could be an indicator as to the level of deformation.
In many embodiments disclosed above, an inner shield nests within an outer shield. In an alternative embodiment to all such embodiments, however, the inner shield is replaced with a removable blade that is integrated into a cutout formed within the wall of the outer shield. In such cases, the outer surface of the inner shield substantially nests within the outer surface of the outer shield so that the flange extends distally past the distal end portion of the outer shield.
In many embodiments disclosed above, the proximal end portion of the substantially tubular portion of the inner shield comprises a stop adapted to abut the proximal end portion of the outer shield, the stop being adapted to prevent excessive distal movement of the inner shield. In other embodiments, the abutment occurs anywhere along the outer shield.
This application claims priority from U.S. provisional patent application Ser. No. 62/214,297, entitled “Multi-Shield Spinal Access System”, by Thommen et al., filed Sep. 4, 2015, the specification of which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4318401 | Zimmerman | Mar 1982 | A |
4573448 | Kambin | Mar 1986 | A |
4646738 | Trott | Mar 1987 | A |
4678459 | Onik et al. | Jul 1987 | A |
4863430 | Klyce et al. | Sep 1989 | A |
4874375 | Ellison | Oct 1989 | A |
4888146 | Dandeneau | Dec 1989 | A |
5080662 | Paul | Jan 1992 | A |
5195541 | Obenchain | Mar 1993 | A |
5207213 | Auhll et al. | May 1993 | A |
5285795 | Ryan et al. | Feb 1994 | A |
5395317 | Kambin | Mar 1995 | A |
5439464 | Shapiro | Aug 1995 | A |
5529580 | Kusunoki et al. | Jun 1996 | A |
5540706 | Aust et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5569290 | McAfee | Oct 1996 | A |
5591187 | Dekel | Jan 1997 | A |
5601569 | Pisharodi | Feb 1997 | A |
5615690 | Giurtino et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
5618293 | Sample et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
5662300 | Michelson | Sep 1997 | A |
5688222 | Hluchy et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
5730754 | Obenchain | Mar 1998 | A |
5733242 | Rayburn et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5735792 | Vanden Hoek et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5792044 | Foley et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5820623 | Ng | Oct 1998 | A |
5885300 | Tokuhashi et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5894369 | Akiba et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5899425 | Corey, Jr. et al. | May 1999 | A |
5954635 | Foley | Sep 1999 | A |
5976075 | Beane et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6017333 | Bailey | Jan 2000 | A |
6033105 | Barker et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6053907 | Zirps | Apr 2000 | A |
6063021 | Hossain et al. | May 2000 | A |
6110182 | Mowlai-Ashtiani | Aug 2000 | A |
6200322 | Branch et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6217509 | Foley et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6234961 | Gray | May 2001 | B1 |
6283966 | Houfburg | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6286179 | Byrne | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6296644 | Saurat et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6322498 | Gravenstein et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6354992 | Kato | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6371968 | Kogasaka et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6383191 | Zdeblick et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6447446 | Smith et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6468289 | Bonutti | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6520495 | La Mendola | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6558407 | Ivanko et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
6575899 | Foley et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6579281 | Palmer et al. | Jun 2003 | B2 |
6626830 | Califiore et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6648915 | Sazy | Nov 2003 | B2 |
6676597 | Guenst et al. | Jan 2004 | B2 |
6685724 | Haluck | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6688564 | Salvermoser et al. | Feb 2004 | B2 |
6758809 | Briscoe et al. | Jul 2004 | B2 |
6808505 | Kadan | Oct 2004 | B2 |
6887198 | Phillips et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
6983930 | La Mendola et al. | Jan 2006 | B1 |
7087058 | Cragg | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7104986 | Hovda et al. | Sep 2006 | B2 |
7137949 | Scirica et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7179261 | Sicvol et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7182731 | Nguyen et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7226413 | McKinley | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7341556 | Shalman | Mar 2008 | B2 |
7434325 | Foley et al. | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7491168 | Raymond et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
7591790 | Pflueger | Sep 2009 | B2 |
7594888 | Raymond et al. | Sep 2009 | B2 |
7618431 | Roehm, III et al. | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7636596 | Solar | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7637905 | Saadat et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7641659 | Emstad et al. | Jan 2010 | B2 |
7771384 | Ravo | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7794456 | Sharps et al. | Sep 2010 | B2 |
7811303 | Fallin et al. | Oct 2010 | B2 |
7931579 | Bertolero et al. | Apr 2011 | B2 |
7946981 | Cubb | May 2011 | B1 |
7951141 | Sharps et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
7959564 | Ritland | Jun 2011 | B2 |
7988623 | Pagliuca et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
8007492 | DiPoto et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
8038606 | Otawara | Oct 2011 | B2 |
8043381 | Hestad et al. | Oct 2011 | B2 |
8062218 | Sebastian et al. | Nov 2011 | B2 |
8079952 | Fujimoto | Dec 2011 | B2 |
8092464 | McKay | Jan 2012 | B2 |
8096944 | Harrel | Jan 2012 | B2 |
8202216 | Melkent et al. | Jun 2012 | B2 |
8206357 | Bettuchi | Jun 2012 | B2 |
8236006 | Hamada | Aug 2012 | B2 |
8267896 | Hartoumbekis et al. | Sep 2012 | B2 |
8303492 | Ito | Nov 2012 | B2 |
8333690 | Ikeda | Dec 2012 | B2 |
8360970 | Mangiardi | Jan 2013 | B2 |
8372131 | Hestad et al. | Feb 2013 | B2 |
8382048 | Nesper et al. | Feb 2013 | B2 |
8397335 | Gordin et al. | Mar 2013 | B2 |
8419625 | Ito | Apr 2013 | B2 |
8435174 | Cropper et al. | May 2013 | B2 |
8460180 | Zarate et al. | Jun 2013 | B1 |
8460186 | Ortiz et al. | Jun 2013 | B2 |
8460310 | Stern | Jun 2013 | B2 |
8518087 | Lopez | Aug 2013 | B2 |
8535220 | Mondschein | Sep 2013 | B2 |
8556809 | Vijayanagar | Oct 2013 | B2 |
8585726 | Yoon et al. | Nov 2013 | B2 |
8602979 | Kitano | Dec 2013 | B2 |
8622894 | Banik et al. | Jan 2014 | B2 |
8636655 | Childs | Jan 2014 | B1 |
8648932 | Talbert et al. | Feb 2014 | B2 |
8688186 | Mao et al. | Apr 2014 | B1 |
8690764 | Clark et al. | Apr 2014 | B2 |
8721536 | Marino et al. | May 2014 | B2 |
8740779 | Yoshida | Jun 2014 | B2 |
8784421 | Carrison et al. | Jul 2014 | B2 |
8821378 | Morgenstern Lopez et al. | Sep 2014 | B2 |
8834507 | Mire et al. | Sep 2014 | B2 |
8845734 | Weiman | Sep 2014 | B2 |
8852242 | Morgenstern Lopez et al. | Oct 2014 | B2 |
8870753 | Boulais et al. | Oct 2014 | B2 |
8870756 | Maurice | Oct 2014 | B2 |
8876712 | Yee et al. | Nov 2014 | B2 |
8888689 | Poll et al. | Nov 2014 | B2 |
8888813 | To | Nov 2014 | B2 |
8894573 | Loftus et al. | Nov 2014 | B2 |
8894653 | Solsberg et al. | Nov 2014 | B2 |
8926502 | Levy et al. | Jan 2015 | B2 |
8932207 | Greenburg et al. | Jan 2015 | B2 |
8932360 | Womble et al. | Jan 2015 | B2 |
8936545 | To | Jan 2015 | B2 |
8936605 | Greenberg | Jan 2015 | B2 |
8952312 | Blanquart et al. | Feb 2015 | B2 |
8961404 | Ito | Feb 2015 | B2 |
8972714 | Talbert et al. | Mar 2015 | B2 |
8974381 | Lovell et al. | Mar 2015 | B1 |
8986199 | Weisenburgh, II et al. | Mar 2015 | B2 |
8992580 | Bar et al. | Mar 2015 | B2 |
9028522 | Prado | May 2015 | B1 |
9050036 | Poll et al. | Jun 2015 | B2 |
9050037 | Poll et al. | Jun 2015 | B2 |
9050146 | Woolley et al. | Jun 2015 | B2 |
9055936 | Mire et al. | Jun 2015 | B2 |
9072431 | Adams et al. | Jul 2015 | B2 |
9078562 | Poll et al. | Jul 2015 | B2 |
9123602 | Blanquart | Sep 2015 | B2 |
9131948 | Fang et al. | Sep 2015 | B2 |
9144374 | Maurice, Jr. | Sep 2015 | B2 |
9153609 | Blanquart | Oct 2015 | B2 |
9198674 | Benson et al. | Dec 2015 | B2 |
9211059 | Drach et al. | Dec 2015 | B2 |
9216016 | Fiechter et al. | Dec 2015 | B2 |
9216125 | Sklar | Dec 2015 | B2 |
9226647 | Sugawara | Jan 2016 | B2 |
9232935 | Brand et al. | Jan 2016 | B2 |
9247997 | Stefanchik et al. | Feb 2016 | B2 |
9265491 | Lins et al. | Feb 2016 | B2 |
9277928 | Morgenstern Lopez | Mar 2016 | B2 |
9307972 | Lovell et al. | Apr 2016 | B2 |
9320419 | Kirma et al. | Apr 2016 | B2 |
RE46007 | Banik et al. | May 2016 | E |
RE46062 | James et al. | Jul 2016 | E |
9386971 | Casey et al. | Jul 2016 | B1 |
9387313 | Culbert et al. | Jul 2016 | B2 |
9414828 | Abidin et al. | Aug 2016 | B2 |
9462234 | Blanquart et al. | Oct 2016 | B2 |
9486296 | Mire et al. | Nov 2016 | B2 |
9492194 | Morgenstern Lopez et al. | Nov 2016 | B2 |
9509917 | Blanquart et al. | Nov 2016 | B2 |
9510853 | Aljuri et al. | Dec 2016 | B2 |
9516239 | Blanquart et al. | Dec 2016 | B2 |
9522017 | Poll et al. | Dec 2016 | B2 |
9526401 | Saadat et al. | Dec 2016 | B2 |
9579012 | Vazales et al. | Feb 2017 | B2 |
9603510 | Ammirati | Mar 2017 | B2 |
9603610 | Richter et al. | Mar 2017 | B2 |
9610007 | Kienzle et al. | Apr 2017 | B2 |
9610095 | To | Apr 2017 | B2 |
9622650 | Blanquart | Apr 2017 | B2 |
9629521 | Ratnakar | Apr 2017 | B2 |
9641815 | Richardson et al. | May 2017 | B2 |
9655605 | Serowski et al. | May 2017 | B2 |
9655639 | Mark | May 2017 | B2 |
9668643 | Kennedy, II et al. | Jun 2017 | B2 |
9675235 | Lieponis | Jun 2017 | B2 |
9700378 | Mowlai-Ashtiani | Jul 2017 | B2 |
9706905 | Levy | Jul 2017 | B2 |
10682130 | White et al. | Jun 2020 | B2 |
10758220 | White et al. | Sep 2020 | B2 |
10869659 | Thommen et al. | Dec 2020 | B2 |
10874425 | Thommen et al. | Dec 2020 | B2 |
20020022762 | Beane et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020035313 | Scirica et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020138020 | Pflueger | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020165560 | Danitz et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20030083555 | Hunt et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030171744 | Leung et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030191474 | Cragg et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20040092940 | Zwimmann | May 2004 | A1 |
20040122446 | Solar | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040127992 | Serhan et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040143165 | Alleyne | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040158286 | Roux et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20050075644 | DiPoto et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050085692 | Kiehn et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050090848 | Adams | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050107671 | McKinley | May 2005 | A1 |
20050187570 | Nguyen et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050256525 | Culbert et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20060041270 | Lenker et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060052671 | McCarthy | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060074445 | Gerber et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060142643 | Parker | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060200186 | Marchek et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060206118 | Kim et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20070049794 | Glassenberg et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070055259 | Norton et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070129634 | Hickey et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070149975 | Oliver et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070162223 | Clark | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070203396 | McCutcheon et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070213716 | Lenke et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070225556 | Ortiz et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070255100 | Barlow et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070260113 | Otawara | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070260120 | Otawara | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070260184 | Justis et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20080015621 | Emanuel | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080033251 | Araghi | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080064921 | Larkin et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080064928 | Otawara | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080081951 | Frasier et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080139879 | Olson et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080147109 | Kambin et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080183189 | Teichman et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080188714 | McCaffrey | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080242930 | Hanypsiak et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080260342 | Kuroiwa | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20090018566 | Escudero et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090024158 | Viker | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090062871 | Chin et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090105543 | Miller et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090149857 | Culbert et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090156898 | Ichimura | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090187080 | Seex | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090240111 | Kessler et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090264895 | Gasperut | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090287061 | Feigenbaum et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090318765 | Torii | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100004651 | Biyani | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100022841 | Takahashi et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100076476 | To et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100114147 | Biyani | May 2010 | A1 |
20100151161 | Da Rolo | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100161060 | Schaller et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100256446 | Raju | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20100280325 | Ibrahim et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20100284580 | OuYang et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20100286477 | OuYang et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20100312053 | Larsen | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20100317928 | Subramaniam | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20110028791 | Marino et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110054507 | Batten et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110056500 | Shin et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110073594 | Bonn | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110098628 | Yeung et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110106261 | Chin et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
20110112588 | Linderman et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
20110125158 | Diwan et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
20110130634 | Solitario, Jr. et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110201888 | Verner | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110230965 | Schell et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110251597 | Bharadwaj et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20110257478 | Kleiner et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20110295070 | Yasunaga | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110319941 | Bar et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20120016192 | Jansen et al. | Jan 2012 | A1 |
20120029412 | Yeung et al. | Feb 2012 | A1 |
20120095296 | Trieu et al. | Apr 2012 | A1 |
20120101338 | O'Prey et al. | Apr 2012 | A1 |
20120111682 | Andre | May 2012 | A1 |
20120116170 | Vayser et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120157788 | Serowski et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120172664 | Hayman et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120209273 | Zaretzka et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120221007 | Batten et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120232350 | Seex | Sep 2012 | A1 |
20120232552 | Morgenstern Lopez et al. | Sep 2012 | A1 |
20120265022 | Menn | Oct 2012 | A1 |
20120298820 | Manolidis | Nov 2012 | A1 |
20120316400 | Vijayanagar | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20130103067 | Fabro et al. | Apr 2013 | A1 |
20130103103 | Mire | Apr 2013 | A1 |
20130150670 | O'Prey et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130150674 | Haig et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130172674 | Kennedy, II et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130172676 | Levy et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130211202 | Perez-Cruet et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
20130282022 | Yousef | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130289399 | Choi et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130303846 | Cybulski et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20130304106 | Breznock | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20140025121 | Foley et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
20140066940 | Fang et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140074170 | Mertens et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140088367 | DiMauro et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140142584 | Sweeney | May 2014 | A1 |
20140148647 | Okazaki | May 2014 | A1 |
20140163319 | Blanquart et al. | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20140180321 | Dias et al. | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20140194697 | Seex | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140215736 | Gomez et al. | Aug 2014 | A1 |
20140221749 | Grant et al. | Aug 2014 | A1 |
20140257296 | Morgenstern Lopez | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140257332 | Zastrozna | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140257489 | Warren et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140275793 | Song | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140275799 | Schuele | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140276840 | Richter et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140276916 | Ahluwalia et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140277204 | Sandhu | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140285644 | Richardson et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140318582 | Mowlai-Ashtiani | Oct 2014 | A1 |
20140336764 | Masson et al. | Nov 2014 | A1 |
20140357945 | Duckworth | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20140378985 | Mafi | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20150018623 | Friedrich et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150065795 | Titus | Mar 2015 | A1 |
20150073218 | Ito | Mar 2015 | A1 |
20150112398 | Morgenstern Lopez et al. | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20150133727 | Bacich et al. | May 2015 | A1 |
20150164496 | Karpowicz et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150216593 | Biyani | Aug 2015 | A1 |
20150223671 | Sung et al. | Aug 2015 | A1 |
20150223676 | Bayer et al. | Aug 2015 | A1 |
20150230697 | Phee | Aug 2015 | A1 |
20150238073 | Charles et al. | Aug 2015 | A1 |
20150272694 | Charles | Oct 2015 | A1 |
20150313585 | Abidin et al. | Nov 2015 | A1 |
20150335389 | Greenberg | Nov 2015 | A1 |
20150342621 | Jackson, III | Dec 2015 | A1 |
20150366552 | Sasaki et al. | Dec 2015 | A1 |
20150374213 | Maurice, Jr. | Dec 2015 | A1 |
20160015467 | Vayser et al. | Jan 2016 | A1 |
20160030061 | Thommen et al. | Feb 2016 | A1 |
20160066965 | Chegini et al. | Mar 2016 | A1 |
20160067003 | Chegini et al. | Mar 2016 | A1 |
20160074029 | O'Connell et al. | Mar 2016 | A1 |
20160095505 | Johnson et al. | Apr 2016 | A1 |
20160106408 | Ponmudi et al. | Apr 2016 | A1 |
20160166135 | Fiset | Jun 2016 | A1 |
20160174814 | Igov | Jun 2016 | A1 |
20160213500 | Beger et al. | Jul 2016 | A1 |
20160228280 | Schuele et al. | Aug 2016 | A1 |
20160235284 | Yoshida et al. | Aug 2016 | A1 |
20160256036 | Gomez et al. | Sep 2016 | A1 |
20160287264 | Chegini et al. | Oct 2016 | A1 |
20160296220 | Mast et al. | Oct 2016 | A1 |
20160345952 | Kucharzyk et al. | Dec 2016 | A1 |
20160353978 | Miller et al. | Dec 2016 | A1 |
20170003493 | Zhao | Jan 2017 | A1 |
20170007226 | Fehling | Jan 2017 | A1 |
20170007294 | Iwasaka et al. | Jan 2017 | A1 |
20170027606 | Cappelleri et al. | Feb 2017 | A1 |
20170042408 | Washburn et al. | Feb 2017 | A1 |
20170042411 | Kang et al. | Feb 2017 | A1 |
20170065287 | Silva et al. | Mar 2017 | A1 |
20170086939 | Vayser et al. | Mar 2017 | A1 |
20170105770 | Woolley et al. | Apr 2017 | A1 |
20170135699 | Wolf | May 2017 | A1 |
20170156755 | Poll et al. | Jun 2017 | A1 |
20170156814 | Thommen et al. | Jun 2017 | A1 |
20170196549 | Piskun et al. | Jul 2017 | A1 |
20170224391 | Biester et al. | Aug 2017 | A1 |
20170245930 | Brannan et al. | Aug 2017 | A1 |
20170280969 | Levy et al. | Oct 2017 | A1 |
20170296038 | Gordon et al. | Oct 2017 | A1 |
20180008138 | Thommen et al. | Jan 2018 | A1 |
20180008253 | Thommen et al. | Jan 2018 | A1 |
20180014858 | Biester et al. | Jan 2018 | A1 |
20180098788 | White et al. | Apr 2018 | A1 |
20180098789 | White et al. | Apr 2018 | A1 |
20180110503 | Flock et al. | Apr 2018 | A1 |
20180110506 | Thommen et al. | Apr 2018 | A1 |
20180153592 | Larson | Jun 2018 | A1 |
20180214016 | Thommen et al. | Aug 2018 | A1 |
20180333061 | Pracyk et al. | Nov 2018 | A1 |
20190209154 | Richter et al. | Jul 2019 | A1 |
20190216454 | Thommen et al. | Jul 2019 | A1 |
20200268368 | White et al. | Aug 2020 | A1 |
20200360048 | White et al. | Nov 2020 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
102727309 | Nov 2014 | CN |
94 15 039 | Nov 1994 | DE |
299 16 026 | Nov 1999 | DE |
0 537 116 | Apr 1993 | EP |
0 807 415 | Nov 1997 | EP |
2481727 | Jan 2012 | GB |
05-207962 | Aug 1993 | JP |
08-278456 | Oct 1996 | JP |
2007-007438 | Jan 2007 | JP |
2008-508943 | Mar 2008 | JP |
2011-512943 | Apr 2011 | JP |
2013-538624 | Oct 2013 | JP |
2014-517710 | Jul 2014 | JP |
2015-500680 | Jan 2015 | JP |
9629014 | Sep 1996 | WO |
9734536 | Sep 1997 | WO |
0156490 | Aug 2001 | WO |
0189371 | Nov 2001 | WO |
0202016 | Jan 2002 | WO |
2004103430 | Dec 2004 | WO |
2006017507 | Feb 2006 | WO |
2007059068 | May 2007 | WO |
2008121162 | Oct 2008 | WO |
2009033207 | Mar 2009 | WO |
2009108318 | Sep 2009 | WO |
2010138083 | Dec 2010 | WO |
2012040239 | Mar 2012 | WO |
2012122294 | Sep 2012 | WO |
2013033426 | Mar 2013 | WO |
2013059640 | Apr 2013 | WO |
2013074396 | May 2013 | WO |
2014050236 | Apr 2014 | WO |
2014100761 | Jun 2014 | WO |
2014185334 | Nov 2014 | WO |
2015175635 | Nov 2015 | WO |
2016111373 | Jul 2016 | WO |
2016131077 | Aug 2016 | WO |
2016168673 | Oct 2016 | WO |
2016201292 | Dec 2016 | WO |
2017006684 | Jan 2017 | WO |
2017015480 | Jan 2017 | WO |
2017040873 | Mar 2017 | WO |
2017083648 | May 2017 | WO |
2018165365 | Sep 2018 | WO |
Entry |
---|
International Preliminary Report on Patentability issued for Application No. PCT/US216/050022, dated Mar. 15, 2018. |
Hott, J. S., et al., “A new table-fixed retractor for anterior odontoid screw fixation: technical note,” J Neurosurg (Spine 3), 2003, v. 98, pp. 118-120. |
Regan, J. M. et al., “Burr Hole Washout versus Craniotomy for Chronic Subdural Hematoma: Patient Outcome and Cost Analysis,” Plos One, Jan. 22, 2015, DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0115085. |
Shalayev, S. G. et al, “Retrospective analysis and modifications of retractor systems for anterior odontoid screw fixation,” Neurosurg Focus 16 (1):Article 14, 2004, pp. 1-4. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/901,435, filed Feb. 21, 2018, Surgical Visualization Systems and Related Methods. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/692,845, filed Aug. 31, 2017, Surgical Visualization Systems and Related Methods. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/697,494, filed Sep. 7, 2017, Multi-Shield Spinal Access System. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/786,846, filed Oct. 18, 2017, Devices and Methods for Surgical Retraction. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/786,858, filed Oct. 18, 2017, Devices and Methods for Providing Surgical Access. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/786,891, filed Oct. 18, 2017, Surgical Access Port Stabilization. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/786,923, filed Oct. 18, 2017, Surgical Instrument Connectors, and Related Methods. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2015/043554, dated Nov. 19, 2015 (8 pages). |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2015/048485, dated Feb. 9, 2016. (16 pages). |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2015/060978, dated Feb. 15, 2016 (8 pages). |
Invitation to Pay Additional Fees for Application No. PCT/US2016/050022, dated Nov. 3, 2016 (2 pages). |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2016/050022, dated Feb. 1, 2017 (19 pages). |
Iprenburg, M, “Percutaneous Transforaminal Endoscopic Discectomy: The Thessys Method,” in Lewandrowski, K., et al, Minimally Invasive Spinal Fusion Techniques, Summit Communications, 2008 pp. 65-81. |
Jung, K., et al., “A hands-free region-of-interest selection interface for solo surgery with a wide-angle endoscope: preclinical proof of concept,” Surg Endosc, 2017, v. 31, pp. 974-980. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/437,792, filed Feb. 21, 2017, Multi-Shield Spinal Access System. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/966,293, filed Apr. 30, 2018, Neural Monitoring Devices and Methods. |
Extended European Search Report for Application No. 16843037.9; dated Mar. 14, 2019 (8 pages). |
International Search Report for Application No. PCT/IB18/57367, United States Patent and Trademark Office dated Jan. 29, 2019, (4 pages). |
U.S. Appl. No. 16/352,654, filed Mar. 13 2019, Multi-Shield Spinal Access System. |
U.S. Appl. No. 16/362,497, filed Mar. 22 2019, Surgical Instrument Connectors and Related Methods. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US18/21466 dated Jul. 3, 2018 (17 pages). |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/931,839, filed May 14, 2020, Surgical Access Port Stabilization. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US18/21454, dated Jul. 3, 2018 (16 pages). |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US18/21449, dated Aug. 27, 2018 (13 pages). |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US18/47136, dated Jan. 23, 2019 (9 pages). |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/EP2020/056706, dated Jun. 9, 2020 (17 pages). |
Japanese Office Action issued in Appln. No. JP 2018-511695, dated May 26, 2020 (21 pages). |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2018/018905, dated May 7, 2018 (10 pages). |
International Search Report and Written Opinion issued for Application No. PCT/US2018/021472, dated Jul. 19, 2018. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US19/18700, dated May 3, 2019 (7 pages). |
Extended European Search Report for Application No. 18758290.3, dated Nov. 27, 2020 (7 pages). |
U.S. Appl. No. 16/985,200, filed Aug. 4 2020, Devices and Methods for Providing Surgical Access. |
U.S. Appl. No. 17/089,695, filed Nov. 4, 2020, Multi-Shield Spinal Access System. |
U.S. Appl. No. 17/159,129, filed Jan. 26, 2021, Multi-Shield Spinal Access System. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20170065269 A1 | Mar 2017 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
62214297 | Sep 2015 | US |