The spinal column has many functions including supporting the body, weight transfer, motion, and protection of the spinal cord and the nerve roots The spinal column is a structure composed primarily of bones, ligaments, muscles, and cartilage. The bones of the spinal column are called vertebrae.
As the population ages, it is anticipated that there will be an increase in adverse spinal conditions which are characteristic of weakened bone. Also, with aging come increases in spinal stenosis, which is characterized by thickening of the bones, which make up the spinal column and facet arthropathy. These degenerative conditions as well as physical trauma can lead to failure or instability of the spinal column. Spinal stenosis is characterized by a reduction in the available space for the passage of blood vessels and nerves.
Spinal stenosis in the neck results in a reduction foraminal area (i.e., the available space for the passage of nerves and blood vessels) which compresses the cervical nerve roots and causes radicular pain. Humpreys, S. C. et al., Flexion and traction effect on C5-C6 foraminal space, Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil., vol. 79 at 1105 (September 1998). Another symptom of spinal stenosis is myelopathy, which results in neck pain and muscle weakness. Id. Extension and ipsilateral rotation of the neck further reduces the foraminal area and contributes to pain, nerve root compression and neural injury. Id.; Yoo, J. U. et al., Effect of cervical spine motion on the neuroforaminal dimensions of human cervical spine, Spine, vol. 17 at 1131 (Nov. 10, 1992). In contrast, neck flexion increases the foraminal area. Humpreys, S. C. et al., at 1105. Pain associated with stenosis can be relieved by medication and/or surgery. Accordingly, there have been developed surgical procedures and implants for alleviating conditions such as spinal stenosis, vertebral fracture and other spinal injury.
Placement of spinal implants requires surgery. Open surgery for placement of spinal implants requires a lengthy hospital stay and an extended convalescence. Open surgery also carries increased risk of infection and other complications. Of course, it is desirable to eliminate the need for major surgery for all individuals and in particular for the elderly. Accordingly, there is a need to develop procedures and implants for alleviating degenerative conditions of the spine which are minimally-invasive, can be tolerated by the elderly and can be performed preferably on an outpatient basis.
Minimally-invasive procedures typically access the site of the spinal intervention through small incisions. Minimally-invasive procedures reduce trauma to the tissue thereby reducing hospital and convalescence time and reducing the risk of complications. However, many implants for minimally-invasive spinal interventions must be assembled prior to insertion, thus requiring larger incisions for insertion. Also, once assembled, the size of the implant cannot be changed inside the patient. If a larger implant is required, the smaller implant must first be removed and a new larger implant inserted.
In view of the foregoing background, it would therefore be desirable to have a spinal implant that could be assembled in situ inside a patient.
It would also be desirable to have a spinal implant system wherein the size of the implant may be adjusted during the procedure depending on patient anatomy without removal of the implant.
It would still further be desirable to have a minimally-invasive surgery procedure for installing an implant that could be assembled in situ inside a patient
The features of the invention, its nature and various advantages will be more apparent from the accompanying drawings and the following detailed description of the preferred embodiments, in which:
In one embodiment, the present application is directed to a spinal implant with two plates that are connected together by a post. The implant is configured for each plate to be positioned on outer lateral sides of spinous processes with the post extending through the interspinous space. The second of the two plates includes a bore that receives the post, and that plate is movable along the length of the post to accommodate different anatomies such as for relatively wide or thin spinous processes, and selectively lockable in position. A gear nut is threaded on a distal section of the post. The gear nut includes external gear teeth that are used to drive the gear nut so as to move the second plate toward the first plate. When the plates are in their desired locations, the second plate is locked in position. The gear nut may then be removed, or may be left in place. The use of the gear nut facilitates assembly and insertion of the spinal implant.
In view of the foregoing background of the invention, it is an object of this invention to provide a spinal implant which may be assembled in situ inside the patient.
It is also an object of this invention to provide a spinal implant system wherein the size of the implant may be adjusted during the procedure depending on patient anatomy without removal of the implant.
It is still further an object of this invention to provide a minimally-invasive surgery procedure for installing an implant which may be assembled in situ inside a patient.
In accordance with the objects and background of the invention, in one embodiment, the present invention provides an implant system for implantation between adjacent spinous processes for the relief of pain associated with the spine. The implant has a series of spacers which may be inserted over a shaft located between adjacent spinous processes thus allowing the implant to be assembled in situ. The spacers limit extension motion of two adjacent spinous processes by resisting compressive forces applied to the spacer by the adjacent spinous processes. The spacer limits movement to preferably limit the collapse of the foraminal canal within which nerves are disposed. When fully assembled, the implant comprises two wings disposed on either end of the spacers. The wings resist undesired movement and maintain the location of the spacers between adjacent spinous processes. Each spacer has a tapered tissue expander to distract the opening between the spinous processes. The shaft is connected to a first wing, and after assembly of one or more spacers over the shaft, a second wing may be inserted over the shaft and locked into place. The spacers may rotate on the shaft relative to the shaft and the wings.
In one embodiment the present invention comprises, a minimally-invasive implant and implant system for alleviating discomfort associated with the spinal column. The implant includes one or more distracting spacers which are self-aligning relative to the uneven surfaces of the spinous processes. The distracting spacers are designed such that they may be inserted in a minimally-invasive manner over a shaft positioned between adjacent spinous processes. The distracting spacers may be inserted sequentially with each spacer increasing the space between the spinous processes. In this manner, the implant may be assembled in situ. The sequential distraction of the spinous process allows a surgeon to evaluate the amount of distraction incrementally and select a final implant size that best accommodates a patient's specific anatomy.
In an alternative embodiment, the implant comprises a shaft connected to a deployable wing which may be inserted between adjacent spinous processes in a collapsed (low-profile) configuration and then deployed into a locking position after passing between adjacent spinous processes. In the low-profile configuration, the implant has a roughly cylindrical shape approximating the cross-sectional shape of the shaft. This low-profile configuration allows the implant to be positioned at a surgical site by way of one or more incisions made approaching the interspinous ligament from one side of the interspinous ligament. A lead-in tissue expander is provided to pierce the interspinous ligament and proceed through the interspinous ligament into position between two adjacent spinous processes. The implant has a series of spacers which may be inserted over the shaft located after it has been located between adjacent spinous processes thus allowing the implant to be assembled in situ. In another alternative embodiment, the implant is provided with a second deployable wing which may be inserted to the implant location in a collapsed (low-profile) configuration and then deployed into a locked position.
In another embodiment the present invention comprises a minimally-invasive procedure for assembling a spinal implant in situ. A shaft attached to a first wing is first positioned between adjacent spinous processes. One or more spacers are then inserted sequentially over the shaft with each spacer increasing the space between the spinous processes. During sequential insertion of each spacer, a tapered tissue expander of each spacer expands the opening between the spinous processes incrementally. After assembly of the one or more spacers onto the shaft a second wing is inserted over the shaft and locked into place.
In an alternative procedure, the first wing connected to the shaft is a deployable wing. The shaft is positioned between the spinous processes with the wing in a low-profile configuration. In some embodiments, the implant may be positioned in its low-profile configuration at a surgical site by way of a cannula. An incision sized to receive the cannula can be made, and the cannula can be positioned at or near the surgical site. The cannula can have a cross-sectional shape generally conforming to a shape of the implant to assist in orienting the implant as desired. For example, the cannula can have a cylindrical shape generally conforming to the cylindrical shape of the shaft. After the shaft is located between adjacent spinous process, the first wing is deployed. One or more spacers are then inserted sequentially over the shaft with each spacer increasing the space between the spinous processes. After sufficient distraction is achieved, a second wing is attached or deployed.
Other implants and methods within the spirit and scope of the invention can be used to relieve pain associated with the spine and/or increase the volume of the spinal canal. Additional objects, advantages, and embodiments of the invention are set forth in part in the description which follows, and in part, will be obvious from this description, or may be learned from the practice of the invention. The following description is of the best modes presently contemplated for practicing various embodiments of the present invention. The description is not to be taken in a limiting sense but is made merely for the purpose of describing the general principles of the invention. The scope of the invention should be ascertained with reference to the claims. In the description of the invention that follows, like numerals or reference designators will be used to refer to like parts or elements throughout. In addition, the left-most digit of a reference number identifies the drawing in which the reference number first appears.
Implant for In Situ Assembly
Referring now to
In
It is to be understood that the cortical bone or the outer bone of the spinous processes is stronger at an anterior position adjacent to the vertebral bodies of the vertebra than at a posterior position distally located from the vertebral bodies. Also, for load bearing, it is biomechanically advantageous for the spacer to be close to the vertebral bodies. In order to facilitate this and to accommodate the anatomical form of the bone structures, as the implant is inserted between the spinous processes and/or urged toward the vertebral bodies, the first spacer 110 may rotate relative to the wings, such as first wing 104, so that first spacer 110 is optimally positioned between the spinous processes, and the first wing 104 is optimally positioned relative to the spinous processes. In this embodiment, first spacer 110 includes a tubular bore 112 which extends the length of first spacer 110. Bore 112 of first spacer 110 is received over shaft 102 of implant 100 and first spacer 110 can rotate about shaft 102. Surface 109 of first wing 104 is sized so as to allow rotation of first spacer 110.
Distal end 114 of first spacer 110 is provided with radiused surface 116. Radiused surface 116 allows first spacer 110 to be inserted over shaft 102 between adjacent spinous processes after shaft 102 has been positioned between adjacent spinous processes. Radiused surface 116 distracts the adjacent spinous processes during insertion of first spacer 110 over shaft 102. First spacer 110 is also provided with alignment holes 123, 125 which allow for additional spacers to be aligned with the first spacer during subsequent insertion.
In
Also in
In
Also in
Referring now to
Referring now to
Referring now to
Referring again to
Referring again to
In this embodiment each of the spacers 110, 120, 130, 140 and 150 of implant 100 have been described as having a radiused surface 116, 126, 136, 146, 156 respectively for incrementally distracting the adjacent spinous processes during sequential insertion of the spacers. The radiused end of spacers 110, 120, 130, 140 and 150 of implant 100 each function as a tissue expander to push apart the adjacent spinous processes during insertion of the spacer. In other embodiments of the present invention a ramped or curved tissue expander may be provided at the distal end 114, 124, 134, 144, 154 of spacers 110, 120, 130, 140 and 150 of implant 100. Such tissue expanders provide for gradual distraction of the spinous processes during introduction of the spacer thereby facilitating the procedure. Referring again to
At least the minor outer diameter of one or more of spacers 110, 120, 130, 140 and 150 of implant 100 is between 6 mm and 14 mm. Typically the minor outer dimension is one of 6 mm, 8 mm, 10 mm, 12 mm, and 14 mm. The different sizes enable the spacer to accommodate different sized patients and allow for incremental distraction of the spinous processes as implant 100 is assembled in situ. The major and minor dimensions of spacers 110, 120, 130, 140 and 150 of implant 100, and the number of spacers may be selected based on the particular application and the specific anatomy of the patient. A surgeon may determine that sufficient distraction has been achieved after the insertion of one or more of spacers 110, 120, 130, 140 and 150 of implant 100. In a preferred embodiment, the spacers are made from titanium. However, spacers in accordance with embodiments of the present invention can also be made from other biocompatible materials as described below.
Implant with Deployable Wing for In-Situ Assembly
Referring now to
Referring now to
Referring again to
Implant 200 includes, in one embodiment, a second spacer 120, third spacer 130, fourth spacer 140 and fifth spacer 150 as described with respect to implant 100. As previously described, the spacers are “nested” in size such that first spacer 110 can fit inside second spacer 120 which can fit inside third spacer 130 which can fit inside fourth spacer 140 which can fit inside fifth spacer 150. First spacer 110 has a cylindrical bore that is sized to receive shaft 202 such that first spacer 110 can rotate about shaft 202. Each spacer has a length dimension which is the same as length dimension 223 of shaft 202. Each spacer has a radiused or tapered distal end which forms a tissue expander that facilitates introduction of the spacer between the spinous processes as illustrated and discussed above with respect to
Referring now to
Procedure for In Situ Assembly of an Implant
Referring now to
For insertion of spinal implants according to one embodiment of the invention, a patient is placed, desirably in a lateral decubitus position with maximum flexion of the lumbar spine. Lateral decubitus position permits easy orientation of the main body assembly during surgery. Generally, the implant can be inserted between the spinous processes from the bottom or right side of the spinous processes to the top or left side of the spinous processes. Such orientation permits easy visualization of the implant when the spacers and second wing are to be assembled. The field is prepared for sterile surgery, and local anesthesia of the area is provided. Once the entry point is determined, local anesthetic is applied to the skin and the underlying musculature.
To insert a spinal implant in one affected vertebral area for a single level implant process, a midline incision about 1.5 inches long is made at the entry point, exposing the supraspinous ligament overlying the spinous processes at the symptomatic level. The fascia may be incised on either side of the spinous processes and supraspinous ligament. The paraspinous musculature can be elevated laterally from both sides of the midline. The supraspinous ligament is desirably preserved. The interspinous ligament may be separated to facilitate insertion of the implant.
To insert spinal implants in adjacent portions of the spine for a double level implant process, a midline incision about 3 inches long is made at the entry point, exposing the supraspinous ligament overlying the spinous processes at the appropriate segments. The fascia is incised if necessary on either side of the spinous processes and supraspinous ligament. The paraspinous musculature can be elevated laterally from both sides of the midline. A first implant 100 can be inserted at the inferior level, and a second implant 100 of the same or different size, can be inserted at the superior, adjacent level after the first implant 100 has been completely secured. If the supraspinous ligament is compromised during the procedure, it can be desirable to suture closed the excision in the ligament after insertion of the spinal implant.
Referring to
In an alternative procedure, illustrated in
As shown in
As shown in
Thus, second spacer 120 is inserted in the direction shown by arrow 330 over first spacer 110 with the aid of alignment tool 331. As second spacer 120 is inserted over first spacer 110 and shaft 102, radiused surface 126 makes first contact with adjacent spinous processes 302, 304. Radiused surface 126 engages adjacent spinous processes 302, 304 and causes adjacent spinous processes 302, 304 to move apart in the directions shown by arrows 331, 332. Introduction of second spacer 120 thereby expands the distance between adjacent spinous processes 302, 304. The surgeon pushes second spacer 120 into the position shown in
As shown in
After third spacer 130 is properly located over second spacer 120, the surgeon may introduce fourth spacer 140 and fifth spacer 150 in the same manner. Fourth spacer 140 and fifth spacer 150 may also be inserted with the aid of an appropriately sized alignment tool 331 which has the same external dimensions as the interior bore of the spacer being inserted. The surgeon may evaluate whether the spinous processes have been sufficiently distracted after the insertion of each spacer to determine whether to insert additional spacers. However, if sufficient distraction of spinous processes 302, 304 has been achieved, the surgeon may install second wing 170 as shown in
After installation of second wing 170, the surgeon may remove shaft extension 101 from shaft 102 at detachment groove 117 (not shown). The material at detachment groove 117 may either be cut or, if thin enough, be snapped. In alternative embodiments, shaft extension 101 is releasably attached to tissue expander 113 by a threaded coupling or another releasable coupling. After removal of the shaft extension 101, the incisions may be sutured and closed.
Procedure for In Situ Assembly of an Implant with a Deployable Wing
Referring now to
As shown in
As shown in
As shown in
Additional spacers may be inserted if necessary in the same way as the second spacer and also as illustrated with respect to implant 100 in
At step 514, if the first spacer has not created sufficient distraction between the adjacent spinous process to alleviate the problems at that motion segment, the physician proceeds with steps 516 to 522 in which another spacer is inserted. Where an additional spacer is required, at step 516 the physician inserts an alignment tool over the shaft extension and engages the first spacer with it. At step 518 the physician inserts the next spacer over the alignment tool. The alignment tool acts as a mandrel for the next spacer and allows it to be inserted over the prior spacer at step 520. The additional spacer further distracts the adjacent spinous process as the spacer is urged over the shaft. After the additional spacer is in position over the shaft, the physician removes the alignment tool at step 522. The physician can then return to step 512 to evaluate the distraction between the adjacent spinous processes.
At step 514, if sufficient distraction has been achieved, the physician proceeds to step 524 to complete the procedure. At step 524, the physician attaches and/or deploys the second wing. When the second wing is detached and deployed, the locking ring or a similar fastener locks the second wing into place thereby retaining any spacers installed over the shaft. At step 526, the physician detaches the shaft extension by snapping, cutting or decoupling the shaft extension from the implant. At step 528, the physician closes the entry port or ports using standard surgical procedures.
Materials for Use in Implants of the Present Invention
In some embodiments, the implant can be fabricated from medical grade metals such as titanium, stainless steel, cobalt chrome, and alloys thereof, or other suitable implant material having similar high strength and biocompatible properties. Additionally, the implant can be at least partially fabricated from a shape memory metal, for example Nitinol, which is a combination of titanium and nickel. Such materials are typically radiopaque, and appear during x-ray imaging, and other types of imaging. As an alternative to metal, the spacers of the present invention may be formed from natural or synthetic bone material.
Implants in accordance with the present invention, and/or portions thereof can also be fabricated from somewhat flexible and/or deflectable material. In these embodiments, the implant and/or portions thereof can be fabricated in whole or in part from medical grade biocompatible polymers, copolymers, blends, and composites of polymers. A copolymer is a polymer derived from more than one species of monomer. A polymer composite is a heterogeneous combination of two or more materials, wherein the constituents are not miscible, and therefore exhibit an interface between one another. A polymer blend is a macroscopically homogeneous mixture of two or more different species of polymer. Many polymers, copolymers, blends, and composites of polymers are radiolucent and do not appear during x-ray or other types of imaging. Implants comprising such materials can provide a physician with a less obstructed view of the spine under imaging, than with an implant comprising radiopaque materials entirely. However, the implant need not comprise any radiolucent materials.
One group of biocompatible polymers is the polyaryl ester ketones which has several members including polyetheretherketone (PEEK), and polyetherketoneketone (PEKK). PEEK is proven as a durable material for implants, and meets the criterion of biocompatibility. Medical grade PEEK is available from Victrex Corporation of Lancashire, Great Britain under the product name PEEK-OPTIMA. Medical grade PEKK is available from Oxford Performance Materials under the name OXPEKK, and also from CoorsTek under the name BioPEKK. These medical grade materials are also available as reinforced polymer resins, such reinforced resins displaying even greater material strength. In an embodiment, the implant can be fabricated from PEEK 450G, which is an unfilled PEEK approved for medical implantation available from Victrex. Other sources of this material include Gharda located in Panoli, India. PEEK 450G has the following approximate properties:
PEEK 450G has appropriate physical and mechanical properties and is suitable for carrying and spreading a physical load between the adjacent spinous processes. The implant and/or portions thereof can be formed by extrusion, injection, compression molding and/or machining techniques.
It should be noted that the material selected can also be filled. Fillers can be added to a polymer, copolymer, polymer blend, or polymer composite to reinforce a polymeric material. Fillers are added to modify properties such as mechanical, optical, and thermal properties. For example, carbon fibers can be added to reinforce polymers mechanically to enhance strength for certain uses, such as for load bearing devices. In some embodiments, other grades of PEEK are available and contemplated for use in implants in accordance with the present invention, such as 30% glass-filled or 30% carbon-filled grades, provided such materials are cleared for use in implantable devices by the FDA, or other regulatory body. Glass-filled PEEK reduces the expansion rate and increases the flexural modulus of PEEK relative to unfilled PEEK. The resulting product is known to be ideal for improved strength, stiffness, or stability. Carbon-filled PEEK is known to have enhanced compressive strength and stiffness, and a lower expansion rate relative to unfilled PEEK. Carbon-filled PEEK also offers wear resistance and load carrying capability.
As will be appreciated, other suitable similarly biocompatible thermoplastic or thermoplastic polycondensate materials that resist fatigue, have good memory, are flexible, and/or deflectable, have very low moisture absorption, and good wear and/or abrasion resistance, can be used without departing from the scope of the invention. As mentioned, the implant can be comprised of polyetherketoneketone (PEKK). Other material that can be used include polyetherketone (PEK), polyetherketoneetherketone-ketone (PEKEKK), polyether-etherketoneketone (PEEKK), and generally a polyaryletheretherketone. Further, other polyketones can be used as well as other thermoplastics. Reference to appropriate polymers that can be used in the implant can be made to the following documents, all of which are incorporated herein by reference. These documents include: PCT Publication WO 02/02148 A1, dated Jan. 10, 2002, entitled “Bio-Compatible Polymeric Materials;” PCT Publication WO 02/00275 A1, dated Jan. 3, 2002, entitled “Bio-Compatible Polymeric Materials;” and, PCT Publication WO 02/00270 A1, dated Jan. 3, 2002, entitled “Bio-Compatible Polymeric Materials.” Other materials such as Bionate7, polycarbonate urethane, available from the Polymer Technology Group, Berkeley, Calif., may also be appropriate because of the good oxidative stability, biocompatibility, mechanical strength and abrasion resistance. Other thermoplastic materials and other high molecular weight polymers can be used.
An implant system for implantation between adjacent spinous processes for the relief of pain associated with the spine is described hereinabove. The implant has a series of spacers which may be inserted over a shaft located between adjacent spinous processes thus allowing the implant to be assembled in situ. The spacers may rotate on the shaft relative to the wings. To minimize trauma to the patient, each spacer has a tapered tissue expander to distract the opening between the spinous processes during assembly. The shaft is connected to a wing which may be a deployable wing. After assembly of one or more spacers over the shaft, a second wing or deployable wing may be inserted over the shaft and locked into place. An implant system for implantation between adjacent spinous processes for the relief of pain associated with the spine. The implant has a series of spacers which may be inserted over a shaft located between adjacent spinous processes thus allowing the implant to be assembled in situ. The spacers may rotate on the shaft relative to the wings. To minimize trauma to the patient, each spacer has a tapered tissue expander to distract the opening between the spinous processes during assembly. The shaft is connected to a wing which may be a deployable wing. After assembly of one or more spacers over the shaft, a second wing or deployable wing may be inserted over the shaft and locked into place.
The foregoing descriptions of the present invention have been presented for purposes of illustration and description. It is not intended to be exhaustive or to limit the invention to the precise forms disclosed. Many modifications and variations will be apparent to practitioners skilled in this art. The embodiments were chosen and described in order to best explain the principles of the invention and its practical application, thereby enabling others skilled in the art to understand the invention for various embodiments and with various modifications as are suited to the particular use contemplated. It is intended that the scope of the invention be defined by the following claims and their equivalents.
This application is a divisional of prior application Ser. No. 11/874,853, filed Oct. 18, 2007, and claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 60/853,963, filed Oct. 24, 2006, both of which are incorporated herein by reference.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
624969 | Peterson | May 1899 | A |
1153797 | Kegreisz | Sep 1915 | A |
1516347 | Pataky | Nov 1924 | A |
1870942 | Beatty | Aug 1932 | A |
2077804 | Morrison | Apr 1937 | A |
2299308 | Creighton | Oct 1942 | A |
2485531 | Dzus et al. | Oct 1949 | A |
2607370 | Anderson | Aug 1952 | A |
2677369 | Knowles | May 1954 | A |
2685877 | Dobelle | Aug 1954 | A |
3065659 | Eriksson et al. | Nov 1962 | A |
3108595 | Overment | Oct 1963 | A |
3397699 | Kohl | Aug 1968 | A |
3426364 | Lumb | Feb 1969 | A |
3648691 | Lumb et al. | Mar 1972 | A |
3779239 | Fischer et al. | Dec 1973 | A |
4011602 | Rybicki et al. | Mar 1977 | A |
4237875 | Termanini | Dec 1980 | A |
4257409 | Bacal et al. | Mar 1981 | A |
4274324 | Giannuzzi | Jun 1981 | A |
4289123 | Dunn | Sep 1981 | A |
4327736 | Inoue | May 1982 | A |
4401112 | Rezaian | Aug 1983 | A |
4499636 | Tanaka | Feb 1985 | A |
4519100 | Wills et al. | May 1985 | A |
4553273 | Wu | Nov 1985 | A |
4554914 | Kapp et al. | Nov 1985 | A |
4573454 | Hoffman | Mar 1986 | A |
4592341 | Omagari et al. | Jun 1986 | A |
4599086 | Doty | Jul 1986 | A |
4604995 | Stephens et al. | Aug 1986 | A |
4611582 | Duff | Sep 1986 | A |
4632101 | Freedland | Dec 1986 | A |
4636217 | Ogilvie et al. | Jan 1987 | A |
4646998 | Pate | Mar 1987 | A |
4657550 | Daher | Apr 1987 | A |
4662808 | Camilleri | May 1987 | A |
4686970 | Dove et al. | Aug 1987 | A |
4704057 | McSherry | Nov 1987 | A |
4721103 | Freedland | Jan 1988 | A |
4759769 | Hedman et al. | Jul 1988 | A |
4787378 | Sodhi | Nov 1988 | A |
4822226 | Kennedy | Apr 1989 | A |
4827918 | Olerud | May 1989 | A |
4834600 | Lemke | May 1989 | A |
4863476 | Shepperd | Sep 1989 | A |
4886405 | Blomberg | Dec 1989 | A |
4892545 | Day et al. | Jan 1990 | A |
4913144 | Del Medico | Apr 1990 | A |
4931055 | Bumpus et al. | Jun 1990 | A |
4932975 | Main et al. | Jun 1990 | A |
4969887 | Sodhi | Nov 1990 | A |
5000166 | Karpf | Mar 1991 | A |
5011484 | Breard | Apr 1991 | A |
5035712 | Hoffman | Jul 1991 | A |
5047055 | Bao et al. | Sep 1991 | A |
5059193 | Kuslich | Oct 1991 | A |
5092866 | Breard et al. | Mar 1992 | A |
5098433 | Freedland | Mar 1992 | A |
5171278 | Pisharodi | Dec 1992 | A |
5201734 | Cozad et al. | Apr 1993 | A |
5267999 | Olerud | Dec 1993 | A |
5290312 | Kojimoto et al. | Mar 1994 | A |
5306275 | Bryan | Apr 1994 | A |
5306310 | Siebels | Apr 1994 | A |
5312405 | Korotko et al. | May 1994 | A |
5316422 | Coffman | May 1994 | A |
5356423 | Tihon et al. | Oct 1994 | A |
5360430 | Lin | Nov 1994 | A |
5366455 | Dove et al. | Nov 1994 | A |
5370697 | Baumgartner | Dec 1994 | A |
5390683 | Pisharodi | Feb 1995 | A |
5395370 | Muller et al. | Mar 1995 | A |
5401269 | Buttner-Janz et al. | Mar 1995 | A |
5403316 | Ashman | Apr 1995 | A |
5415661 | Holmes | May 1995 | A |
5437672 | Alleyne | Aug 1995 | A |
5437674 | Worcel et al. | Aug 1995 | A |
5439463 | Lin | Aug 1995 | A |
5454812 | Lin | Oct 1995 | A |
5456689 | Kresch et al. | Oct 1995 | A |
5458641 | Ramirez Jimenez | Oct 1995 | A |
5480442 | Bertagnoli | Jan 1996 | A |
5496318 | Howland et al. | Mar 1996 | A |
5518498 | Lindenberg et al. | May 1996 | A |
5540689 | Sanders et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5554191 | Lahille et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5562662 | Brumfield et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5562735 | Margulies | Oct 1996 | A |
5571192 | Schonhoffer | Nov 1996 | A |
5609634 | Voydeville | Mar 1997 | A |
5609635 | Michelson | Mar 1997 | A |
5628756 | Barker, Jr. et al. | May 1997 | A |
5630816 | Kambin | May 1997 | A |
5645599 | Samani | Jul 1997 | A |
5653762 | Pisharodi | Aug 1997 | A |
5653763 | Errico et al. | Aug 1997 | A |
5658335 | Allen | Aug 1997 | A |
5665122 | Kambin | Sep 1997 | A |
5674295 | Ray et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
5676702 | Ratron | Oct 1997 | A |
5685826 | Bonutti | Nov 1997 | A |
5690649 | Li | Nov 1997 | A |
5693100 | Pisharodi | Dec 1997 | A |
5702391 | Lin | Dec 1997 | A |
5702395 | Hopf | Dec 1997 | A |
5702452 | Argenson et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5702455 | Saggar | Dec 1997 | A |
5707390 | Bonutti | Jan 1998 | A |
5716416 | Lin | Feb 1998 | A |
5723013 | Jeanson et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5725341 | Hofmeister | Mar 1998 | A |
5746762 | Bass | May 1998 | A |
5749916 | Richelsoph | May 1998 | A |
5755797 | Baumgartner | May 1998 | A |
5800547 | Schafer et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5810815 | Morales | Sep 1998 | A |
5836948 | Zucherman et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5849004 | Bramlet | Dec 1998 | A |
5860977 | Zucherman et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5888196 | Bonutti | Mar 1999 | A |
5941881 | Barnes | Aug 1999 | A |
5976186 | Bao et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5980523 | Jackson | Nov 1999 | A |
6022376 | Assell et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6048342 | Zucherman et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6068630 | Zucherman et al. | May 2000 | A |
6074390 | Zucherman et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6102922 | Jakobsson et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6126689 | Brett | Oct 2000 | A |
6126691 | Kasra et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6127597 | Beyar et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6132464 | Martin | Oct 2000 | A |
6190413 | Sutcliffe | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6190414 | Young | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6214037 | Mitchell et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6214050 | Huene | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6245107 | Ferree | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6293949 | Justis et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6336930 | Stalcup et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6348053 | Cachia | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6352537 | Strnad | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6364883 | Santilli | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6371987 | Weiland et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6375682 | Fleischmann et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6402750 | Atkinson et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6402751 | Hoeck et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6419703 | Fallin et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6419704 | Ferree | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6432130 | Hanson | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6436140 | Liu et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6440169 | Elberg et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6447513 | Griggs | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6447546 | Bramlet et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6451019 | Zucherman et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6500178 | Zucherman et al. | Dec 2002 | B2 |
6511508 | Shahinpoor et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6514256 | Zucherman et al. | Feb 2003 | B2 |
6520991 | Huene | Feb 2003 | B2 |
6527803 | Crozet et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6554833 | Levy | Apr 2003 | B2 |
6572653 | Simonson | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6582433 | Yun | Jun 2003 | B2 |
6582467 | Teitelbaum et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6592585 | Lee et al. | Jul 2003 | B2 |
6626944 | Taylor | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6645207 | Dixon et al. | Nov 2003 | B2 |
6669729 | Chin | Dec 2003 | B2 |
6685742 | Jackson | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6695842 | Zucherman et al. | Feb 2004 | B2 |
6699246 | Zucherman et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6709435 | Lin | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6723126 | Berry | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6730126 | Boehm, Jr. et al. | May 2004 | B2 |
6733531 | Trieu | May 2004 | B1 |
6733534 | Sherman | May 2004 | B2 |
6736818 | Perren et al. | May 2004 | B2 |
6743257 | Castro | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6758863 | Estes et al. | Jul 2004 | B2 |
6761720 | Senegas | Jul 2004 | B1 |
6770096 | Bolger et al. | Aug 2004 | B2 |
6783530 | Levy | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6835205 | Atkinson et al. | Dec 2004 | B2 |
6902580 | Fallin et al. | Jun 2005 | B2 |
6905512 | Paes et al. | Jun 2005 | B2 |
6946000 | Senegas et al. | Sep 2005 | B2 |
6981975 | Michelson | Jan 2006 | B2 |
7011685 | Arnin et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7041136 | Goble et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7048736 | Robinson et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7070598 | Lim et al. | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7081120 | Li et al. | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7087055 | Lim et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7087083 | Pasquet et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7097648 | Globerman et al. | Aug 2006 | B1 |
7097654 | Freedland | Aug 2006 | B1 |
7101375 | Zucherman et al. | Sep 2006 | B2 |
7163558 | Senegas et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7201751 | Zucherman et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7217293 | Branch, Jr. | May 2007 | B2 |
7238204 | Le Couedic et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7306628 | Zucherman et al. | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7335203 | Winslow et al. | Feb 2008 | B2 |
7377942 | Berry | May 2008 | B2 |
7431735 | Liu et al. | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7442208 | Mathieu et al. | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7445637 | Taylor | Nov 2008 | B2 |
7458981 | Fielding et al. | Dec 2008 | B2 |
7582106 | Teitelbaum et al. | Sep 2009 | B2 |
7604652 | Arnin et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
7611316 | Panasik et al. | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7621950 | Globerman et al. | Nov 2009 | B1 |
7641673 | Le Couedic et al. | Jan 2010 | B2 |
7658752 | Labrom et al. | Feb 2010 | B2 |
7749252 | Zucherman et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 |
7771456 | Hartmann et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7862615 | Carli et al. | Jan 2011 | B2 |
7901430 | Matsuura et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
7927354 | Edidin et al. | Apr 2011 | B2 |
20010016743 | Zucherman et al. | Aug 2001 | A1 |
20010049527 | Cragg | Dec 2001 | A1 |
20020143331 | Zucherman et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20030040746 | Mitchell et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030045940 | Eberlein et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030065330 | Zucherman et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030153915 | Nekozuka et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030176925 | Paponneau | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20040010312 | Enayati | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040010316 | William et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040064094 | Freyman | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040087947 | Lim et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040097931 | Mitchell | May 2004 | A1 |
20040106995 | LeCouedic et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040117017 | Pasquet et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040133204 | Davies | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040133280 | Trieu | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040158248 | Ginn | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040167625 | Beyar et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040172029 | Lerch | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040186577 | Ferree | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040199255 | Mathieu et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040260397 | Lambrecht et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050010293 | Zucherman et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050033434 | Berry | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050049590 | Alleyne et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050049708 | Atkinson et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050056292 | Cooper | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050085814 | Sherman et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050143827 | Globerman et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050165398 | Reiley | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050203512 | Hawkins et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050203519 | Harms et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050203624 | Serhan et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050228391 | Levy et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050245937 | Winslow | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050261768 | Trieu | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050267579 | Reiley et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050273166 | Sweeney | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050288672 | Ferree | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060004447 | Mastrorio et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060004455 | Leonard et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060015181 | Elberg | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060047282 | Gordon | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060064165 | Zucherman et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060084983 | Kim | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060084985 | Kim | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060084987 | Kim | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060084988 | Kim | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060085069 | Kim | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060085070 | Kim | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060085074 | Raiszadeh | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060089654 | Lins et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060089719 | Trieu | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060095136 | McLuen | May 2006 | A1 |
20060106381 | Ferree et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060106397 | Lins | May 2006 | A1 |
20060111728 | Abdou | May 2006 | A1 |
20060116690 | Pagano | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060122620 | Kim | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060129239 | Kwak | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060136060 | Taylor | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060142858 | Colleran et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060149242 | Kraus et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060182515 | Panasik et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060184247 | Edidin et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060184248 | Edidin et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060195102 | Malandain | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060217726 | Maxy et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060224159 | Anderson | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060224241 | Butler et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060235387 | Peterman | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060235532 | Meunier et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060241601 | Trautwein et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060241613 | Bruneau et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060241643 | Lim et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060241757 | Anderson | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060247623 | Anderson et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060247640 | Blackwell et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060264938 | Zucherman et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060265074 | Krishna et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060271044 | Petrini et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060271049 | Zucherman et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060271061 | Beyer et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060282075 | Labrom et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20060282079 | Labrom et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20060293662 | Boyer, II et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20060293663 | Walkenhorst et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070005064 | Anderson et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070010813 | Zucherman et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070032790 | Aschmann et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070043362 | Malandain et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070043363 | Malandain et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070049935 | Edidin et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070073289 | Kwak et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070100340 | Lange et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070123861 | Dewey et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070142915 | Altarac et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070151116 | Malandain | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070162000 | Perkins | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070167945 | Lange et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070173822 | Bruneau et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070173823 | Dewey et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070191833 | Bruneau et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070191834 | Bruneau et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070191837 | Trieu | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070191838 | Bruneau et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070198091 | Boyer et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070225807 | Phan et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070225810 | Colleran et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070233068 | Bruneau et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070233074 | Anderson et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070233076 | Trieu | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070233081 | Pasquet et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070233084 | Betz et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070233089 | DiPoto et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070250060 | Anderson et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070270823 | Trieu et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070270824 | Lim et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070270825 | Carls et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070270826 | Trieu et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070270827 | Lim et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070270828 | Bruneau et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070270829 | Carls et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070270834 | Bruneau et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070270874 | Anderson | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070272259 | Allard et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070276368 | Trieu et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070276369 | Allard et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070276493 | Malandain et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070276496 | Lange et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070276497 | Anderson | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070282443 | Globerman et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20080021457 | Anderson et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080021460 | Bruneau et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080058934 | Malandain et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080097446 | Reiley et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080114357 | Allard et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080114358 | Anderson et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080114456 | Dewey et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080147190 | Dewey et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080161818 | Kloss et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080167685 | Allard et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080177306 | Lamborne et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080183209 | Robinson et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080183211 | Lamborne et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080183218 | Mueller et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080195152 | Altarac et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080215094 | Taylor | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080221685 | Altarac et al. | Sep 2008 | A9 |
20080234824 | Youssef et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080243250 | Seifert et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080262617 | Froehlich et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080281359 | Abdou | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20080281360 | Vittur et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20080281361 | Vittur et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20090062915 | Kohm et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090099610 | Johnson et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090105766 | Thompson et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090105773 | Lange et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090234389 | Chuang et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090240283 | Carls et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090264927 | Ginsberg et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090270918 | Attia et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090292316 | Hess | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090326538 | Sennett et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100036419 | Patel et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100121379 | Edmond | May 2010 | A1 |
20100191241 | McCormack et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100204732 | Aschmann et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100211101 | Blackwell et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20110054531 | Lamborne et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110144692 | Saladin et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110166600 | Lamborne et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2821678 | Nov 1979 | DE |
3922044 | Feb 1991 | DE |
4012622 | Jul 1991 | DE |
202006018978 | Feb 2007 | DE |
0322334 | Feb 1992 | EP |
0767636 | Jan 1999 | EP |
1004276 | May 2000 | EP |
1011464 | Jun 2000 | EP |
1138268 | Oct 2001 | EP |
1148850 | Oct 2001 | EP |
1148851 | Oct 2001 | EP |
1302169 | Apr 2003 | EP |
1330987 | Jul 2003 | EP |
1552797 | Jul 2003 | EP |
1854433 | Nov 2007 | EP |
1905392 | Apr 2008 | EP |
1982664 | Oct 2008 | EP |
2623085 | May 1989 | FR |
2625097 | Jun 1989 | FR |
2681525 | Mar 1993 | FR |
2700941 | Aug 1994 | FR |
2703239 | Oct 1994 | FR |
2707864 | Jan 1995 | FR |
2717675 | Sep 1995 | FR |
2722087 | Jan 1996 | FR |
2722088 | Jan 1996 | FR |
2724554 | Mar 1996 | FR |
2725892 | Apr 1996 | FR |
2730156 | Aug 1996 | FR |
2731643 | Sep 1996 | FR |
2775183 | Aug 1999 | FR |
2799948 | Apr 2001 | FR |
2816197 | May 2002 | FR |
02-224660 | Sep 1990 | JP |
09-075381 | Mar 1997 | JP |
2003079649 | Mar 2003 | JP |
988281 | Jan 1983 | SU |
1484348 | Jun 1989 | SU |
WO 9426192 | Nov 1994 | WO |
WO 9426195 | Nov 1994 | WO |
WO 9718769 | May 1997 | WO |
WO 9820939 | May 1998 | WO |
WO 9926562 | Jun 1999 | WO |
WO 0044319 | Aug 2000 | WO |
WO 0154598 | Aug 2001 | WO |
WO 03057055 | Jul 2003 | WO |
WO 2004047689 | Jun 2004 | WO |
WO 2004047691 | Jun 2004 | WO |
WO 2004084743 | Oct 2004 | WO |
WO 2004084768 | Oct 2004 | WO |
WO 2004110300 | Dec 2004 | WO |
WO 2005009300 | Feb 2005 | WO |
WO 2005011507 | Feb 2005 | WO |
WO 2005044118 | May 2005 | WO |
WO 2005048856 | Jun 2005 | WO |
WO 2005110258 | Nov 2005 | WO |
WO 2006064356 | Jun 2006 | WO |
WO 2007034516 | Mar 2007 | WO |
WO 2007052975 | May 2007 | WO |
WO 2009083276 | Jul 2009 | WO |
WO 2009083583 | Jul 2009 | WO |
WO 2009098536 | Aug 2009 | WO |
Entry |
---|
“Dispositivo Intervertebrale Ammortizzante DIAM,” date unknown, p. 1. |
Anasetti et al., “Spine Stability After Implantation of an Interspinous Device: An In Vitro and Finite Element Biomechanical Study,” J. Neurosurg. Spine, Nov. 2010, vol. 13, pp. 568-575. |
Bellini et al., “Biomechanics of the Lumbar Spine After Dynamic Stabilization,” J. Spinal Discord Tech., 2006, vol. 00, No. 00, pp. 1-7. |
Benzel et al., “Posterior Cervical Interspinous Compression Wiring and Fusion for Mid to Low Cervical Spinal Injuries,” J. Neurosurg., Jun. 1989, pp. 893-899, vol. 70. |
Bini et al., “Minimally Invasive Treatment of Moderate Lumbar Spinal Stenosis with the Superion® Interspinous Spacer,” The Open Orthopaedics Journal, May 27, 2011, pp. 361-367, vol. 5. |
Buric et al., “DIAM Device for Low Back Pain in Degenerative Disc Disease 24 Months Follow-up,” Advances in Minimally Invasive Surgery and Therapy for Spine and Nerves, Alexandre et al., eds., 2011, pp. 177-182, Spinger-Verlat/Wien. |
Caserta et al., “Elastic Stabilization Alone or Combined with Rigid Fusion in Spinal Surgery: a Biomechanical Study and Clinical Experience Based on 82 Cases,” Eur. Spine J., Oct. 2002, pp. S192-S197, vol. 11, Suppl. 2. |
Christie et al., “Dynamic Interspinous Process Technology,” SPINE, 2005, pp. S73-S78, vol. 30, No. 16S. |
Cousin Biotech, Dispositif Intervertébral Amortissant, Jun. 1998, pp. 1-4. |
Dickman et al., “The Interspinous Method of Posterior Atlantoaxial Arthrodesis,” J. Neurosurg., Feb. 1991, pp. 190-198, vol. 74. |
Dubois et al., “Dynamic Neutralization: A New Concept for Restabilization of the Spine,” Lumbar Segmental Insability, Szpalski et al., eds., 1999, pp. 233-240, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. |
Ebara et al., “Inoperative Measurement of Lumbar Spinal Instability,” SPINE, 1992, pp. S44-S50, vol. 17, No. 3S. |
Fassio et al., “Treatment of Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Instability L4-L5 by Interspinous Ligamentoplasty,” Rachis, Dec. 1991, pp. 465-474, vol. 3, No. 6. |
Fassio, “Mise au Point Sur la Ligamentoplastie Inter-Epineuse Lombaire Dans les Instabilites,” Maîtrise Orthopédique, Jul. 1993, pp. 18, No. 25. |
Garner et al., “Development and Preclinical Testing of a New Tension-Band Device for the Spine: the Loop System,” Eur. Spine J., Aug. 7, 2002, pp. S186-S191, vol. 11, Suppl. 2. |
Guang et al., “Interspinous Process Segmental Instrumentation with Bone-Button-Wire for Correction of Scoliosis,” Chinese Medical J., 1990, pp. 721-725, vol. 103. |
Guizzardi et al., “The Use of DIAM (Interspinous Stress-Breaker Device) in the Prevention of Chronic Low Back Pain in Young Patients Operated on for Large Dimension Lumbar Disc Herniation,” 12th Eur. Cong. Neurosurg., Sep. 7-12, 2003, pp. 835-839, Port. |
Hambly et al., “Tension Band Wiring-Bone Grafting for Spondylolysis and Spondylolisthesis,” SPINE, 1989, pp. 455-460, vol. 14, No. 4. |
Kiwerski, “Rehabilitation of Patients with Thoracic Spine Injury Treated by Spring Alloplasty,” Int. J. Rehab. Research, 1983, pp. 469-474, vol. 6, No. 4. |
Kramer et al., “Intervetertebral Disk Diseases: Causes, Diagnosis, Treatment and Prophylaxis,” pp. 244-249, Medical, 1990. |
Laudet et al., “Comportement Bio-Mécanique D'Un Ressort Inter-Apophysaire Vertébral Postérieur Analyse Expérimentale Due Comportement Discal En Compression Et En Flexion/Extension,” Rachis, 1993, vol. 5, No. 2. |
Mah et al., “Threaded K-Wire Spinous Process Fixation of the Axis for Modified Gallie Fusion in Children and Adolescents,” J. Pediatric Othopaedics, 1989, pp. 675-679, vol. 9. |
Mariottini et al., “Preliminary Results of a Soft Novel Lumbar Intervertebral Prothesis (DIAM) in the Degenerative Spinal Pathology,” Acta Neurochir., Adv. Peripheral Nerve Surg. and Minimal Invas. Spinal Surg., 2005, pp. 129-131, vol. 92, Suppl. |
McDonnell et al., “Posterior Atlantoaxial Fusion: Indications and Techniques,” Techniques in Spinal Fusion and Stabilization, Hitchon et al., eds., 1995, pp. 92-106, Ch. 9, Thieme, New York. |
Minns et al., “Preliminary Design and Experimental Studies of a Novel Soft Implant for Correcting Sagittal Plane Instability in the Lumbar Spine,” SPINE, 1997, pp. 1819-1825, vol. 22, No. 16. |
Müller, “Restauration Dynamique de la Stabilité Rachidienne,” Tiré de la Sulzer Technical Review, Jan. 1999, Sulzer Management Ltd, Winterthur, Switzerland. |
Pennal et al., “Stenosis of the Lumbar Spinal Canal,” Clinical Neurosurgery: Proceedings of the Congress of Neurological Surgeons, St. Louis, Missouri, 1970, Tindall et al., eds., 1971, Ch. 6, pp. 86-105, vol. 18. |
Petrini et al., “Analisi Di Un'Esperienza Clinica Con Un Impianto Posteriore Ammortizzante,” S.O.T.I.M.I. Società di Ortopedia e Traumatologia dell'Italia Meridionale e Insulare 90° Congresso, Jun. 21-23, 2001, Paestum. |
Petrini et al., “Stabilizzazione Elastica,” Patologia Degenerativa del Rachide Lombare, Oct. 5-6, 2001, Rimini. |
Phillips et al., “Biomechanics of Posterior Dynamic Stabiling Device (DIAM) After Facetectomy and Disectomy,” The Spine Journal, 2006, vol. 6, pp. 714-722. |
Porter, “Spinal Stenosis and Neurogenic Claudication,” SPINE, Sep. 1, 1996, pp. 2046-2052, vol. 21, No. 17. |
Pupin et al., “Clinical Experience with a Posterior Shock-Absorbing Implant in Lumbar Spine,” World Spine 1: First Interdisciplinary World Congress on Spinal Surgery and Related Disciplines, Aug. 27-Sep. 1, 2000, Berlin, Germany. |
Rengachary et al., “Cervical Spine Stabilization with Flexible, Multistrand Cable System,” Techniques in Spinal Fusion and Stabilization, Hitchon et al., eds., 1995, pp. 79-81, Ch. 7, Thieme, New York. |
Richards et al., “The Treatment Mechanism of an Interspinous Process Implant for Lumbar Neurogenic Intermittent Claudication,” SPINE, 2005, pp. 744-749, vol. 30, No. 7. |
Schiavone et al., “The Use of Disc Assistance Prosthesis (DIAM) in Degenerative Lumbar Pathology: Indications, Technique, Results,” Italian J. Spinal Disorders, 2003, pp. 213-220, vol. 3, No. 2. |
Schlegel et al., “The Role of Distraction in Improving the Space Available in the Lumbar Stenotic Canal and Foramen,” SPINE, 1994, pp. 2041-2047, vol. 19, No. 18. |
Senegas et al., “Le Recalibrage du Canal Lombaire, Alternative à la Laminectomie dans le Traitement des Sténoses du Canal Lombaire,” Revue de Chirurgie Orthopédique, 1988, pp. 15-22. |
Senegas et al., “Stabilisation Lombaire Souple,” Instabilité Vertébrales Lombaires, Gastambide, ed., 1995, pp. 122-132, Expansion Scientifique Française, Paris, France. |
Senegas, “La Ligamentoplastie Inter Vertébrale Lombaire, Alternative a L'Arthrodèse,” La Revue de Medécine Orthopédique, Jun. 1990, pp. 33-35, No. 20. |
Senegas, “La Ligamentoplastie Intervertébrale, Alternative à L'arthrodèse dans le Traitement des Instabilités Dégénératives,” Acta Othopaedica Belgica, 1991, pp. 221-226, vol. 57, Suppl. I. |
Senegas, “Mechanical Supplementation by Non-Rigid Fixation in Degenerative Intervertebral Lumbar Segments: the Wallis System,” Eur. Spine J., 2002, p. 5164-5169, vol. 11, Suppl. 2. |
Senegas, “Rencontre,” Maîtrise Orthopédique, May 1995, pp. 1-3, No. 44. |
Serhan, “Spinal Implants: Past, Present, and Future,” 19th International IEEE/EMBS Conference, Oct. 30-Nov. 2, 1997, pp. 2636-2639, Chicago, Illinois. |
Spadea et al., “Interspinous Fusion for the Treatment of Herniated Intervertebral Discs: Utilizing a Lumbar Spinous Process as a Bone Graft,” Annals of Surgery, 1952, pp. 982-986, vol. 136, No. 6. |
Taylor et al., “Analyse d'une experience clinique d'un implant postérieur amortissant,” Rachis Revue de Pathologie Vertébrale, Oct./Nov. 1999, vol. 11, No. 4-5, Gieda Inter Rachis. |
Taylor et al., “Device for Intervertebral Assisted Motion: Technique and Intial Results,” 22 Neurosurg. Focus, Jan. 2007, vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 1-6. |
Taylor et al., “Technical and Anatomical Considerations for the Placement of a Posterior Interspinous Stabilizer,” 2004, pp. 1-10, Medtronic Sofamor Danek USA, Inc., Memphis, Tennessee. |
Taylor, “Biomechanical Requirements for the Posterior Control of the Centers of Rotation,” Swiss Spine Institute International Symposium: Progress in Spinal Fixation, Jun. 21-22, 2002, pp. 1-2, Swiss Spine Institute, Bern, Switzerland. |
Taylor, “Non-Fusion Technologies of the Posterior Column: A New Posterior Shock Absorber,” International Symposium on Intervertebral Disc Replacement and Non-Fusion-Technology, May 3-5, 2001, Spine Arthroplasty. |
Taylor, “Présentation à un an d'un dispositif amortissant d'assistance discale,” 5èmes journées Avances & Controverses en pathologie rachidienne, Oct. 1-2, 1998, Faculté Libre de Médecine de Lille. |
Tsuji et al., “Ceramic Interspinous Block (CISB) Assisted Anterior Interbody Fusion,” J. Spinal Disorders, 1990, pp. 77-86, vol. 3, No. 1. |
Vangilder, “Interspinous, Laminar, and Facet Posterior Cervical Bone Fusions,” Techniques in Spinal Fusion and Stabilization, Hitchon et al., eds., 1995, pp. 135-146, Ch. 13, Thieme, New York. |
Voydeville et al., “Experimental Lumbar Instability and Artificial Ligament,” Eur. J. Orthop. Surg. Traumatol., Jul. 15, 2000, pp. 167-176, vol. 10. |
Voydeville et al., “Lumbar Instability Treated by Intervertebral Ligamentoplasty with Smooth Wedges,” Orthopédie Traumatologie, 1992, pp. 259-264, vol. 2, No. 4. |
Waldemar Link, “Spinal Surgery: Instrumentation and Implants for Spinal Surgery,” 1981, Link America Inc., New Jersey. |
Wilke et al., “Biomedical Effect of Different Lumbar Interspinous Implants on Flexibilty and Intradiscal Pressure,” Eur Spine J., Vo. 17, published online Jun. 27, 2008, pp. 1049-1056. |
Wiltse et al., “The Treatment of Spinal Stenosis,” Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, Urist, ed., Mar.-Apr. 1976, pp. 83-91, No. 115. |
Wisneski et al., “Decompressive Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis,” Seminars in Spine Surgery, Wiesel, ed., Jun. 1994, pp. 116-123, vol. 6, No. 2. |
Zdeblick et al., “Two-Point Fixation of the Lumbar Spine Differential Stability in Rotation,” SPINE, 1991, pp. S298-S301, vol. 16, No. 6, Supplement. |
Zhao et al., “Efficacy of The Dynamic Interspinous Assisted Motion System in Clinical Treatment of Degenerative Lumbar Disease,” Chin. Med. J., 2010, vol. 123, No. 21, pp. 2974-2977. |
Zucherman et al., “Clinical Efficacy of Spinal Instrumentation in Lumbar Degenerative Disc Disease,” SPINE, Jul. 1992, pp. 834-837, vol. 17, No. 7. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20120109205 A1 | May 2012 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60853963 | Oct 2006 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 11874853 | Oct 2007 | US |
Child | 13346332 | US |