Literature DB >> 20512313

[Long-term results of the Dynesys implant].

C Klöckner1.   

Abstract

Dynamic stabilization was introduced in 1994 as a motion preserving device in an attempt to overcome the disadvantages of fusion and to provide sufficient stability, to restore normal segmental kinematics, to prevent instability, and to avoid adjacent segmental degeneration. The results in patients with spinal stenosis with or without degenerative spondylolisthesis can be considered good. Decompression should be performed in the most cases. Disc degeneration of the bridged and the adjacent segment seems to continue despite Dynesys stabilization. It is likely that this continuing degeneration is due to natural disease progression rather than an effect of stabilization.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20512313     DOI: 10.1007/s00132-009-1585-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Orthopade        ISSN: 0085-4530            Impact factor:   1.087


  25 in total

1.  Dynamic neutralisation of the lumbar spine confirmed on a new lumbar spine simulator in vitro.

Authors:  S Freudiger; G Dubois; M Lorrain
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 3.067

2.  [Posterior dynamic stabilization as an alternative for dorso-ventral fusion in spinal stenosis with degenerative instability].

Authors:  B Cakir; B Ulmar; H Koepp; K Huch; W Puhl; M Richter
Journal:  Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb       Date:  2003 Jul-Aug

3.  [Application of a dynamic pedicle screw system (DYNESYS) for lumbar segmental degenerations - comparison of clinical and radiological results for different indications].

Authors:  M Putzier; S V Schneider; J Funk; C Perka
Journal:  Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb       Date:  2004 Mar-Apr

4.  Adjacent segment mobility after rigid and semirigid instrumentation of the lumbar spine.

Authors:  Balkan Cakir; Charles Carazzo; René Schmidt; Thomas Mattes; Heiko Reichel; Wolfram Käfer
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2009-05-20       Impact factor: 3.468

5.  Disc changes in the bridged and adjacent segments after Dynesys dynamic stabilization system after two years.

Authors:  Abhishek Kumar; James Beastall; Justin Hughes; Efthimios J Karadimas; Malcolm Nicol; Francis Smith; Douglas Wardlaw
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2008-12-15       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  The effect of disc degeneration and facet joint osteoarthritis on the segmental flexibility of the lumbar spine.

Authors:  A Fujiwara; T H Lim; H S An; N Tanaka; C H Jeon; G B Andersson; V M Haughton
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2000-12-01       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  The transition zone above a lumbosacral fusion.

Authors:  M F Hambly; L L Wiltse; N Raghavan; G Schneiderman; C Koenig
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1998-08-15       Impact factor: 3.468

8.  Minimum four-year follow-up of spinal stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis treated with decompression and dynamic stabilization.

Authors:  Stefan Schaeren; Ivan Broger; Bernhard Jeanneret
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2008-08-15       Impact factor: 3.468

9.  Dynamic stabilization in addition to decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis.

Authors:  Klaus John Schnake; Stefan Schaeren; Bernard Jeanneret
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2006-02-15       Impact factor: 3.468

10.  The relationship between disc degeneration and flexibility of the lumbar spine.

Authors:  N Tanaka; H S An; T H Lim; A Fujiwara; C H Jeon; V M Haughton
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2001 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 4.166

View more
  1 in total

1.  In vivo compatibility of Dynesys(®) spinal implants: a case series of five retrieved periprosthetic tissue samples and corresponding implants.

Authors:  M Neukamp; C Roeder; S Y Veruva; D W MacDonald; S M Kurtz; M J Steinbeck
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-12-06       Impact factor: 3.134

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.