Clinical Symposium II: Interspinous-based Dynamic Stabilization

Neel Anand MD (Clinical Symposia Deputy Editors) , Harvinder Sandhu MD
{"title":"Clinical Symposium II: Interspinous-based Dynamic Stabilization","authors":"Neel Anand MD (Clinical Symposia Deputy Editors) ,&nbsp;Harvinder Sandhu MD","doi":"10.1016/S1935-9810(08)70033-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Interspinous-based dynamic stabilization has become a popular form of treatment in recent years. Though many companies have developed innovative designs for interspinous spacer devices, there are many questions yet to be answered. Some of these devices have considerably more clinical experience than others, but their role in the treatment of spinal pathologies is still controversial.</p><p>The mechanism of action in itself has not been fully elucidated, though many theories have been proposed. Validation of these theories becomes important to determining the appropriate indications for use of these devices. Without a clear understanding of the mechanism of action or what these implants really do, their future would remain questionable. The general consensus seems to be that these devices help by unloading the facet joints and thereby have a role to play in treating back pain arising from facet arthrosis. Others have used a spacer device to indirectly decompress the spinal canal in spinal stenosis. The effect on the disc itself is still largely undetermined.</p><p>The stability provided by these devices is also unknown and has led to some innovative designs including tethers that bind the device to the spinous processes. Wings and flanges have been designed to keep the device in place and the importance of maintaining the interspinous ligament post implantation is indeed unknown.</p><p>Although only one spacer has been FDA-approved for use in the US, we now have several years of follow-up data on hundreds of patients from well-designed IDE studies of multiple devices. Other devices have received the CE mark in Europe. Changes have been made to designs and materials in several spacer devices.</p><p>To help us better understand the mechanisms and design challenges of some of these devices and to get a fresh update on the results of ongoing testing, we went to 3 esteemed surgeons who have been instrumental in the development, refinement, and testing of 3 of the interspinous spacers: Coflex, Diam, and X-Stop. Their insight into this technology is presented in this symposium for our readers.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":88695,"journal":{"name":"SAS journal","volume":"2 3","pages":"Pages 150-154"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S1935-9810(08)70033-1","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SAS journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1935981008700331","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Introduction

Interspinous-based dynamic stabilization has become a popular form of treatment in recent years. Though many companies have developed innovative designs for interspinous spacer devices, there are many questions yet to be answered. Some of these devices have considerably more clinical experience than others, but their role in the treatment of spinal pathologies is still controversial.

The mechanism of action in itself has not been fully elucidated, though many theories have been proposed. Validation of these theories becomes important to determining the appropriate indications for use of these devices. Without a clear understanding of the mechanism of action or what these implants really do, their future would remain questionable. The general consensus seems to be that these devices help by unloading the facet joints and thereby have a role to play in treating back pain arising from facet arthrosis. Others have used a spacer device to indirectly decompress the spinal canal in spinal stenosis. The effect on the disc itself is still largely undetermined.

The stability provided by these devices is also unknown and has led to some innovative designs including tethers that bind the device to the spinous processes. Wings and flanges have been designed to keep the device in place and the importance of maintaining the interspinous ligament post implantation is indeed unknown.

Although only one spacer has been FDA-approved for use in the US, we now have several years of follow-up data on hundreds of patients from well-designed IDE studies of multiple devices. Other devices have received the CE mark in Europe. Changes have been made to designs and materials in several spacer devices.

To help us better understand the mechanisms and design challenges of some of these devices and to get a fresh update on the results of ongoing testing, we went to 3 esteemed surgeons who have been instrumental in the development, refinement, and testing of 3 of the interspinous spacers: Coflex, Diam, and X-Stop. Their insight into this technology is presented in this symposium for our readers.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
临床专题讨论会II:间歇动力稳定
近年来,基于间隙的动态稳定治疗已成为一种流行的治疗形式。尽管许多公司已经开发出了棘间间隔装置的创新设计,但仍有许多问题尚未得到解答。其中一些设备比其他设备有更多的临床经验,但它们在脊柱疾病治疗中的作用仍然存在争议。虽然已经提出了许多理论,但作用机制本身尚未完全阐明。这些理论的验证对于确定使用这些器械的适当适应症非常重要。如果对这些植入物的作用机制或真正的作用没有明确的了解,它们的未来将仍然是值得怀疑的。普遍的共识似乎是,这些装置有助于卸载小关节,因此在治疗小关节关节炎引起的背痛中发挥作用。其他人使用间隔装置间接减压椎管狭窄。对光盘本身的影响在很大程度上仍不确定。这些装置提供的稳定性也是未知的,并导致了一些创新的设计,包括将装置绑定到棘突上的系索。机翼和法兰被设计用来保持装置的位置,并且在植入后维持棘间韧带的重要性确实是未知的。虽然只有一种间隔剂被fda批准在美国使用,但我们现在有数百名患者的数年随访数据,这些数据来自设计良好的多种装置的IDE研究。其他设备已在欧洲获得CE标志。一些隔离装置的设计和材料已经发生了变化。为了帮助我们更好地了解这些装置的机制和设计挑战,并获得正在进行的测试的最新结果,我们采访了3位受人尊敬的外科医生,他们在开发、改进和测试3种棘间间隔器(Coflex、Diam和X-Stop)方面发挥了重要作用。他们对这项技术的见解将在本次研讨会上呈现给我们的读者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Preclinical and clinical experience with a viscoelastic total disc replacement Kineflex lumbar artificial disc versus Charité lumbar total disc replacement for the treatment of degenerative disc disease: A randomized non-inferiority trial with minimum of 2 years' follow-up Vertebral augmentation treatment of painful osteoporotic compression fractures with the Kiva VCF Treatment System Effects of preoperative education on spinal surgery patients An attempt at clinically defining and assessing minimally invasive surgery compared with traditional “open” spinal surgery
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1