Literature DB >> 28324328

Interspinous implants to treat spinal stenosis.

Raj J Gala1,2, Glenn S Russo3, Peter G Whang3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Lumbar spinal stenosis has historically been treated with open decompressive surgery which is associated with significant morbidity and may give rise to various complications. Interspinous spacers (ISS) have been developed as a less invasive strategy which may serve to avoid many of these risks. The two current spacers that are FDA approved and commercially available are the Coflex and Superion devices. The goal is to review these two implants, their indications, and patient selection. RECENT
FINDINGS: The Coflex device has been shown to be analogous to decompression and fusion when treating moderate spinal stenosis. It provides dynamic stability after a decompression is performed, without the rigidity of pedicle-screw instrumentation. Recent results show improved outcomes in Coflex patients at 3 years of follow-up, as compared to decompression and fusion. The Superion implant is placed percutaneously in the interspinous space with minimal disruption of spinal anatomy. When compared to the X-Stop device (which is no longer available), the Superion implant shows improved outcomes at 3 years of follow-up. ISS are lesser invasive options as compared to formal decompression and fusion for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Coflex; Interspinous devices; Interspinous spacers; Lumbar spinal stenosis; Neurogenic claudication; Superion

Year:  2017        PMID: 28324328      PMCID: PMC5435644          DOI: 10.1007/s12178-017-9413-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med        ISSN: 1935-9748


  19 in total

Review 1.  Interspinous process devices in the lumbar spine.

Authors:  Christopher M Bono; Alexander R Vaccaro
Journal:  J Spinal Disord Tech       Date:  2007-05

2.  Interspinous dynamic stabilization adjacent to fusion versus double-segment fusion for treatment of lumbar degenerative disease with a minimum follow-up of three years.

Authors:  Xiao-Long Chen; Li Guan; Yu-Zeng Liu; Jin-Cai Yang; Wen-Long Wang; Yong Hai
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2016-04-27       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 3.  Spinal stenosis and neurogenic claudication.

Authors:  R W Porter
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1996-09-01       Impact factor: 3.468

4.  The treatment mechanism of an interspinous process implant for lumbar neurogenic intermittent claudication.

Authors:  Joshua C Richards; Sharmila Majumdar; Derek P Lindsey; Gary S Beaupré; Scott A Yerby
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2005-04-01       Impact factor: 3.468

5.  Superion interspinous process spacer for intermittent neurogenic claudication secondary to moderate lumbar spinal stenosis: two-year results from a randomized controlled FDA-IDE pivotal trial.

Authors:  Vikas V Patel; Peter G Whang; Thomas R Haley; W Daniel Bradley; Pierce D Nunley; Raphael P Davis; Larry E Miller; Jon E Block; Fred H Geisler
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2015-03-01       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  Pathology and pathogenesis of lumbar spondylosis and stenosis.

Authors:  W H Kirkaldy-Willis; J H Wedge; K Yong-Hing; J Reilly
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1978-12       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  Minimally invasive treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis with a novel interspinous spacer.

Authors:  Shay Shabat; Larry E Miller; Jon E Block; Reuven Gepstein
Journal:  Clin Interv Aging       Date:  2011-09-08       Impact factor: 4.458

8.  Minimally invasive treatment of moderate lumbar spinal stenosis with the superion interspinous spacer.

Authors:  Walter Bini; Larry E Miller; Jon E Block
Journal:  Open Orthop J       Date:  2011-10-14

9.  Superion(®) InterSpinous Spacer for treatment of moderate degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: durable three-year results of a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Vikas V Patel; Pierce D Nunley; Peter G Whang; Thomas R Haley; W Daniel Bradley; Raphael P Davis; Jon E Block; Fred H Geisler
Journal:  J Pain Res       Date:  2015-10-03       Impact factor: 3.133

Review 10.  Controversies about interspinous process devices in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spine diseases: past, present, and future.

Authors:  Roberto Gazzeri; Marcelo Galarza; Alex Alfieri
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2014-04-13       Impact factor: 3.411

View more
  12 in total

1.  The Use of Vertiflex® Interspinous Spacer Device in Patients With Lumbar Spinal Stenosis and Concurrent Medical Comorbidities.

Authors:  Jason Hartman; Michelle Granville; Robert E Jacobson
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2019-08-12

2.  Dimensions of the spinous process and interspinous space: a morphometric study.

Authors:  Guang-Xun Lin; Tsz-King Suen; Javier Quillo-Olvera; Kutbuddin Akbary; Jung-Woo Hur; Eun Kim; Eun-Jin Park; Jin-Sung Kim
Journal:  Surg Radiol Anat       Date:  2018-09-04       Impact factor: 1.246

3.  A minimally invasive lumbar decompression procedure after an interspinous spacer device implantation: an uncommon order of treatment with a successful outcome.

Authors:  Salomon Poliwoda; Nazir Noor; Ivan Urits; Omar Viswanath; Christian Gonzalez; Alan D Kaye
Journal:  Orthop Rev (Pavia)       Date:  2022-06-27

Review 4.  Current concepts of spondylosis and posterior spinal motion preservation for radiologists.

Authors:  Jack Porrino; Aditya Rao; Jay Moran; Annie Wang; Jonathan Grauer; Andrew Haims; Kimia Kani
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2021-06-15       Impact factor: 2.199

5.  Decompression and Interlaminar Stabilization for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Cohort Study and Two-Dimensional Operative Video.

Authors:  Olivia E Gilbert; Sarah E Lawhon; Twila L Gaston; Jared M Robichaux; Gabriel Claudiu Tender
Journal:  Medicina (Kaunas)       Date:  2022-04-05       Impact factor: 2.948

6.  Comparison of two FDA-approved interspinous spacers for treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis: Superion versus X-STOP-a meta-analysis from five randomized controlled trial studies.

Authors:  He Zhao; Li-Jun Duan; Yu-Shan Gao; Yong-Dong Yang; Ding-Yan Zhao; Xiang-Sheng Tang; Zhen-Guo Hu; Chuan-Hong Li; Si-Xue Chen; Tao Liu; Xing Yu
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2018-03-02       Impact factor: 2.359

7.  Interlaminar stabilization offers greater biomechanical advantage compared to interspinous stabilization after lumbar decompression: a finite element analysis.

Authors:  Teng Lu; Yi Lu
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2020-07-29       Impact factor: 2.359

Review 8.  Cost-effectiveness and Safety of Interspinous Process Decompression (Superion).

Authors:  Kevin Cairns; Tim Deer; Dawood Sayed; Kim van Noort; Kevin Liang
Journal:  Pain Med       Date:  2019-12-01       Impact factor: 3.750

9.  A minimum 8-year follow-up comparative study of decompression and coflex stabilization with decompression and fusion.

Authors:  Xiaoqing Zheng; Zhida Chen; Honglong Yu; Jianxiong Zhuang; Hui Yu; Yunbing Chang
Journal:  Exp Ther Med       Date:  2021-04-09       Impact factor: 2.447

10.  Biomechanical changes of degenerated adjacent segment and intact lumbar spine after lumbosacral topping-off surgery: a three-dimensional finite element analysis.

Authors:  Liangliang Cao; Yumei Liu; Wei Mei; Jianguang Xu; Shi Zhan
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2020-02-15       Impact factor: 2.362

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.