Top Surgeons - Latest Technology

Complete Multi-level Spine Solutions

Navigation Links

Spinal Kinetics

 

Maverick  Lumbar Disc

Lumbar Testimonials

Cervical ADR

Cervical Testimonials
Home Disc Replacement Studies Surgery Fee/Details Stenum ADR Team
Click here to Contact Stenum Hospital for a free evaluation

 


ProDisc-L

ProDisc-L Articles
Vertical Split Fracture of the Vertebral Body Following Total Disc Replacement Using ProDisc: Report of Two Cases
Journal of Spinal Disorders & Techniques: October 2005 - Volume 18 - Issue 5 - pp 465-469 full article > > - Astract Below

Bilateral Pedicle Fractures Following Anterior Dislocation of the Polyethylene Inlay of a ProDisc Disc Replacement
Spine: 1 June 2005 - Volume 30 - Issue 11 - pp E311-E314 full article > > - Astract Below

ProDisc Study - "requiring revision surgery at the index level in 8.7% of the patients" Read the Study
Journal of Spinal Disorders & Techniques:
October 2005 - Volume 18 - Issue 5 - pp 465-469
Vertical Split Fracture of the Vertebral Body Following Total Disc Replacement Using ProDisc: Report of Two Cases
Shim, Chan Shik MD, PhD; Lee, Seungcheol MD; Maeng, Dae Hyun MD; Lee, Sang-Ho MD, PhD
Abstract
As ProDisc has a tall keel on the plates, it has the potential to cause a vertical fracture of the vertebral body. However, to our knowledge, there is no previously reported case of a vertical split fracture of the vertebral body after ProDisc disc arthroplasty that was attributed to the keel design of the ProDisc. We report two cases of vertical split fracture of the vertebral body after total disc replacement (TDR) with ProDisc and discuss the issue of the height of the keel of the prosthesis. Even though there was no serious clinical consequence as a result of the fracture in our cases, except the fact that the patients were dissatisfied with the surgery at 3-month follow-up because of the prolonged back pain, the potential of the fracture to cause other serious complications such as hematoma, device migration, or surgical failure cannot be ignored. The keel design of the ProDisc has the disadvantage that it can cause a vertebral body fracture in some patients. Therefore, care should be exercised not to fracture the vertebral body when TDR is done with the ProDisc, especially in a patient with small vertebral body height or when it is done at multiple levels.

http://journals.lww.com/jspinaldisorders/pages/articleviewer.aspx?year=2005&issue=10000&article=00017&type=abstract

Spine: 1 June 2005 - Volume 30 - Issue 11 - pp E311-E314
Bilateral Pedicle Fractures Following Anterior Dislocation of the Polyethylene Inlay of a ProDisc(R) Artificial Disc Replacement:
A Case Report of an Unusual Complication
Mathew, Philip MRCS; Blackman, Mark FRCS; Redla, Sridhar MD, FRCR; Hussein, Ahmed A. FRCS
Abstract
Study Design. An unusual complication resulting from an artificial disc replacement for lumbar degenerative disc disease and its treatment are reported
Objective.
To describe the clinical circumstance, radiologic findings, treatment, and outcome of bilateral pedicle fractures associated with dislocation of the polyethylene inlay of a ProDisc® replacement at L5/S1 level. Summary of Background Data. To the authors' knowledge, no published reports in the English literature have described bilateral pedicle fractures following a single level artificial lumbar total disc replacement.
Methods. A 30-year-old male underwent a ProDisc® total disc replacement at L5/S1 level for discogenic pain. Six-week postoperative assessment showed improvement in the visual analog and Oswestry scores. Assessment at 18 weeks postoperatively for acute pain revealed an anterior slip of the superior plate component, and computerized tomography showed bilateral pedicle fractures of the fifth lumbar vertebra. At surgery, the poly insert was found to have dislocated anteriorly. A salvage interbody fusion was then performed using the stand-alone anterior lumbar interbody fusion cage.
Results. The most recent review confirmed radiologic evidence of fusion with improvement in the subjective evaluation scores Conclusions. We hypothesize that the current implant design in which the contribution to lordosis angle is purely from the superior component may be responsible for the reported complication. We suggest that dividing the contribution equally between both endplates might increase the stability, and this has been discussed with the manufacturers.

http://journals.lww.com/spinejournal/pages/articleviewer.aspx?year=2005&issue=06010&article=00028&type=abstract

 

 

 

Spinal Kinetics M6
"The kinematic signatures of the intact human disc and the M6 artificial disc are nearly identical."
"There has been no serious device-related adverse events, surgical re-interventions, or evidence of device migration, expulsion, or subsidence in this study group." More about M6 disc replacement here > >


Site Map

The information at GETADR.com is not intended as a substitute for medical advice but is to be used only as an aid in understanding ADR options. GETADR.com provides links to other organizations as a service and is not responsible for, services, or products provided by these health professionals, or companies.

Copyright © 2005 RideOne Enterprises, Inc.  All rights reserved. 

Revised: 10/20/06