Clinical performance of an elastomeric lumbar disc replacement: Minimum 12 months follow-up

SAS Journal

Volumn 4, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 16-25

  Pimenta, Luiz ^a   Springmuller, Raul ^b   Lee, Casey K ^c   Oliveira, Leonardo ^a   Roth, Sandra E ^c   Ogilvie, William F ^c  

^a Santa Rita Hospital   (Brazil)

^b Unidad de Cuidados Intensivos   (Chile)

^c Whippany ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

Lumbar; Prospective clinical trial; Spinal arthroplasty; Total disc replacement

Indexed keywords

ELASTOMER; POLYCARBONATE; POLYURETHAN;

ADULT; ARTICLE; ARTIFICIAL LUMBAR DISK; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEVICE; EVALUATION; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT; HUMAN; IMPLANT; LOW BACK PAIN; LUMBAR DISK REPLACEMENT; MALE; OPERATION DURATION; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT SATISFACTION; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PREOPERATIVE EVALUATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RANGE OF MOTION; SAFETY; SELF REPORT; SHORT FORM 36; SPINE DISEASE; SPINE RADIOGRAPHY; SPINE SURGERY; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; SURGICAL APPROACH; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VISUAL ANALOG SCALE;

EID: 77649101943     PISSN: 19359810     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.esas.2009.12.002     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Bono C.M., and Garfin S.R. History and evolution of disc replacement. Spine J 4 6 Suppl (2004) 145S-150S
2. Errico T.J. Lumbar disc arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 435 (2005) 106-117
3. Hallab N., Link H.D., and McAfee P.C. Biomaterial optimization in total disc arthroplasty. Spine 28 (2003) S139-S152
4. Link H.D. History, design and biomechanics of the LINK SB Charite artificial disc. Eur Spine J 11 Suppl 2 (2002) S98-S105
5. Mathews H.H., Lehuec J.C., Friesem T., Zdeblick T., and Eisermann L. Design rationale and biomechanics of Maverick Total Disc arthroplasty with early clinical results. Spine J 4 6 Suppl (2004) 268S-275S
6. Valdevit A., and Errico T.J. Design and evaluation of the FlexiCore metal-on-metal intervertebral disc prosthesis. Spine J 4 6 Suppl (2004) 276S-288S
7. Shim C.S., Lee S.H., Shin H.D., et al. CHARITE versus ProDisc: a comparative study of a minimum 3-year follow-up. Spine 32 (2007) 1012-1018
8. Phillips F.M., Diaz R., and Pimenta L. The fate of the facet joints after lumbar total disc replacement: a two-year clinical and MRI study. Paper presented at (2005), Spine Arthroplasty Society 5, New York, NY
9. Mathew P., Blackman M., Redla S., and Hussein A.A. Bilataeral pedicle fractures following anterior dislocation of the polyethylene inlay of a ProSisc artificial disc replacement: a case report of an unusual complication. Spine 30 (2005) E311-E314
10. Schulte T.L., Lerner T., Hackenberg L., Liljenqvist U., and Bullman V. Acquired spondylolysis after implantataion of a lumbar ProDisc II proshesis: Case report and review of the literature. Spine 32 (2007) E646-E648
11. Fraser R.D., Ross E.R., Lowery G.L., Freeman B.J., and Dolan M. AcroFlex design and results. Spine J 4 6 Suppl (2004) 245S-251S
12. Enker P., Steffee A., McMillin C., Keppler L., Biscup R., and Miller S. Artificial disc replacement. Preliminary report with a 3-year minimum follow-up. Spine 18 (1993) 1061-1070
13. Hagg O., Fritzell P., and Nordwall A. The clinical importance of changes in outcome scores after treatment for chronic low back pain. Eur Spine J 12 (2003) 12-20
14. Polly Jr. D.W., Glassman S.D., Schwender J.D., et al. SF-36 PCS benefit-cost ratio of lumbar fusion comparison to other surgical interventions: a thought experiment. Spine 32 11 Suppl (2007) S20-S26
15. Guyer R.D., Geisler F.H., Blumenthal S.L., McAfee P.C., and Mullin B.B. Effect of age on clinical and radiographic outcomes and adverse events following 1-level lumbar arthroplasty after a minimum 2-year follow-up. J Neurosurg Spine 8 (2008) 101-107
16. Blumenthal S., McAfee P.C., Guyer R.D., et al. A prospective, randomized, multicenter Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemptions study of lumbar total disc replacement with the CHARITE artificial disc versus lumbar fusion: part I: evaluation of clinical outcomes. Spine 30 (2005) 1565-1575 discussion E387-91
17. Guyer R.D., McAfee P.C., Banco R.J., et al. Prospective, randomized, multicenter Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption study of lumbar total disc replacement with the CHARITE artificial disc versus lumbar fusion: five-year follow-up. Spine J 9 (2009) 374-386
18. Zigler J., Delamarter R., Spivak J.M., et al. Results of the prospective, randomized, multicenter Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption study of the ProDisc-L total disc replacement versus circumferential fusion for the treatment of 1-level degenerative disc disease. Spine 32 (2007) 1155-1162 discussion 1163
19. McAfee P.C., Cunningham B., Holsapple G., et al. A prospective, randomized, multicenter Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption study of lumbar total disc replacement with the CHARITE artificial disc versus lumbar fusion: part II: evaluation of radiographic outcomes and correlation of surgical technique accuracy with clinical outcomes. Spine 30 (2005) 1576-1583 discussion E1388-590
20. Lee C.K., Langrana N.A., Parsons J.R., and Zimmerman M.C. Development of a prosthetic intervertebral disc. Spine 16 6 Suppl (1991) S253-S255
21. Huang R.C., Girardi F.P., Cammisa Jr. F.P., et al. The implications of constraint in lumbar total disc replacement. J Spinal Disord Tech 16 (2003) 412-417
22. Huang R.C., Wright T.M., Panjabi M.M., and Lipman J.D. Biomechanics of nonfusion implants. Orthop Clin North Am 36 (2005) 271-280
23. Serhan H., Ross R., Lowery G.L., and Fraser R.D. Biomechanical characterization of a new lumbar disc prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 84 (2002) -B(Suppl 3):215
24. Moore R.J., Fraser R.D., Vernon-Roberts B., et al. The biologic response to particles from a lumbar disc prosthesis. Spine 27 (2002) 2088-2094
25. Belanger M.C., Marois Y., Roy R., et al. Selection of a polyurethane membrane for the manufacture of ventricles for a totally implantable artificial heart: blood compatibility and biocompatibility studies. Artif Organs 24 (2000) 879-888
26. Hutchinson D.T., Savory K.M., and Bachus K.N. Crack-growth properties of various elastomers with potential application in small joint prostheses. J Biomed Mater Res 37 (1997) 94-99
27. Santerre J.P., Woodhouse K., Laroche G., et al. Understanding the biodegradation of polyurethanes: from classical implants to tissue engineering materials. Biomaterials 26 (2005) 7457-7470
28. Wiggins M.J., Anderson J.M., and Hiltner A. Biodegradation of polyurethane under fatigue loading. J Biomed Mater Res A 65 (2003) 524-535
29. Lee CK C.A., Roth S.E., Ogilvie W.F., and Ho E. Development of a Strong Polymer-Metal Interface for Spinal Prostheses (2008),, Miami, FL