Literature DB >> 9280017

Preliminary design and experimental studies of a novel soft implant for correcting sagittal plane instability in the lumbar spine.

R J Minns1, W K Walsh.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: A novel soft implant design for resisting the instability of the lumbar spine in the sagittal plane was mechanically tested.
OBJECTIVES: To ascertain whether a soft preformed implant made of differing grades of silicone would contribute to stabilizing the lumbar spine in the sagittal plane. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Methods of stabilizing the lumbar spine in patients who present with chronic low back pain have usually concentrated on rigidly fixing the associated segment. This has many inherent problems with both the surgical methods and the long-term rigidity at and away from the stabilized site. To the authors knowledge, no "soft" interspinous spacer that would allow a certain amount of flexion but still stabilize the movements associated with instability at the level of the lesion has been investigated mechanically as an alternative to rigid fixation or prosthetic replacement.
METHODS: The apparatus was designed to allow a cadaveric lumbar motion segment to be tested in compression at four angles of flexion with loads up to 700 N. The intradiscal pressure and sagittal plane stiffness were recorded during loading, with and without various sizes of the soft silicone implants placed between the spinous processes.
RESULTS: Insertion of the silicone implants between the spinous processes reduced the intradiscal pressure under load at the angles of flexion tested. The size of the interspinous space determines the optimal diameter of the implant that afforded sagittal stability, the load-bearing contribution of the implant, and the prevention of disc space narrowing at the level investigated.
CONCLUSIONS: A circular silicone spacer placed between the spinous processes appears to contribute to the stability of the cadaveric lumbar spine. There are many attractions to using a simple, soft implant that can be placed with minimal surgery between the spinous processes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9280017     DOI: 10.1097/00007632-199708150-00004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  21 in total

1.  Interspinous implant with unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis in elderly patients.

Authors:  Sung-Joo Ryu; In-Soo Kim
Journal:  J Korean Neurosurg Soc       Date:  2010-05-31

2.  Long-term reduction in pain and disability after surgery with the interspinous device for intervertebral assisted motion (DIAM) spinal stabilization system in patients with low back pain: 4-year follow-up from a longitudinal prospective case series.

Authors:  Josip Buric; Massimiliano Pulidori
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-01-29       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 3.  Role of lumbar interspinous distraction on the neural elements.

Authors:  Alex Alfieri; Roberto Gazzeri; Julian Prell; Christian Scheller; Jens Rachinger; Christian Strauss; Andreas Schwarz
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2012-05-02       Impact factor: 3.042

4.  [Biomechanics of interspinous spacers].

Authors:  H-J Wilke; J Drumm; K Häussler; C Mack; A Kettler
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 1.087

5.  [Long-term results, status of studies and differential indication regarding the DIAM implant].

Authors:  F A Krappel
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 1.087

6.  Adjacent segment instability after treatment with a Graf ligament at minimum 8 years' followup.

Authors:  Yongsoo Choi; Kisoo Kim; Kwangyoung So
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2009-05-19       Impact factor: 4.176

7.  Effect of a novel interspinous implant on lumbar spinal range of motion.

Authors:  Robert Gunzburg; Marek Szpalski; Stuart A Callary; Christopher J Colloca; Victor Kosmopoulos; Deed Harrison; Robert J Moore
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2009-02-07       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  Biomechanical effect of different lumbar interspinous implants on flexibility and intradiscal pressure.

Authors:  Hans-Joachim Wilke; J Drumm; K Häussler; C Mack; W-I Steudel; A Kettler
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2008-06-27       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  Minimally invasive surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  Wouter A Moojen; Niels A Van der Gaag
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2016-09-22

10.  Does Wallis implant reduce adjacent segment degeneration above lumbosacral instrumented fusion?

Authors:  Panagiotis Korovessis; Thomas Repantis; Spyros Zacharatos; Andreas Zafiropoulos
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2009-04-23       Impact factor: 3.134

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.