Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Intervertebral Disk Prosthesis

  • Chapter
Biomechanics and Biomaterials in Orthopedics

  • 906 Accesses

Abstract

Sir John Charnley revolutionized modern orthopedics with his development of total hip replacement [1]. Today, hip and knee arthroplasties are two of the most highly rated surgical procedures in terms of patient satisfaction. It is possible that the development of an artificial disk may impact the treatment of degenerative disk disease in a similar fashion. Although the challenges associated with developing a prosthetic disk are great, the potential to improve the lives of many individuals suffering from symptoms of spinal spondylosis is tremendous.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Bibliography

  • Bednar JM, Friedenberg ZB, Turner ML. Bipolar femoral endoprosthesis: a study correlating component movement with clinical outcome. J Trauma 1988;28(5):664–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bochner RM, Pellicci PM, Lyden JP. Bipolar hemiarthroplasty for fracture of the femoral neck. Clinical review with special emphasis on prosthetic motion. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1988;70(7):1001–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drinker H, Murray WR. The universal proximal femoral endoprosthesis. A short-term comparison with conventional hemiarthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1979; 61(8):1167–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eiskjaer S, Gelineck J, Soballe K. Fractures of the femoral neck treated with cemented bipolar hemiarthroplasty. Orthopedics 1989;12(12): 1545–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Enker P, Steffee AD. Total disk replacement. In: Bridwell KH, DeWald RL, editors. The Textbook of Spinal Surgery. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven, 1997:2275–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langan P. The Giliberty bipolar prosthesis: a clinical and radiographical review. Clin Orthop 1979;(141):169–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ray CD. The Raymedica prosthetic disk nucleus: an update. In: Keach DL, Jinkins JR, editors. Spinal Restabilisation Procedures. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2002;273–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaccaro AR, Silber JS. Post-traumatic spinal deformity. Spine 2001;15;26(24 Suppl):S111–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weinstein PR. Anatomy of the lumbar spine. In: Hardy RW, editor. Lumbar Disk Disease. New York: Raven Press, 1982:5–15.

    Google Scholar 

References

  1. Charnley J. Total hip replacement. JAMA 1974;230: 1025–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Nachemson AL. Challenge of the artificial disk. In: Weinstein JN, editor. Clinical efficacy and outcome in the diagnosis and treatment of low back pain. New York: Raven Press, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Fernstrom U. Arthroplasty with intercorporal endo-prothesis in herniated disk and in painful disk. Acta Chir Scand (Suppl) 1966;357:154–9.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Rothman RH, Simeone FA, Bernini PM. Lumbar disk disease. In: Rothman RH, Simeone FA, editors. The Spine. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders, 1982: 508–645.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Pearce RH, Grimmer BJ, Adams ME. Degeneration and the chemical composition of the human lumbar intervertebral disk. J Orthop Res 1987;5:198–205.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Kirkaldy-Willis WH, Wedge JH, Yong-Hing K, Reilly J. Pathology and pathogenesis of spondylosis and stenosis. Spine 1978;3:319–28.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Crock HV. Internal disk disruption: a challenge to disk prolapse 50 years on. Spine 1986;11:650–3.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Kääpä E, Holm S, Han X, Takala T, Kovanen V, Vanharanta H. Collagens in the injured porcine intervertebral disk. J Orthop Res 1994;12:93–102.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Keller TS, Hansson TH, Abram AC, Spengler DM, Panjabi MM. Regional variations in the compressive properties of lumbar vertebral trabeculae. Effects of disk degeneration. Spine 1989;14:1012–19.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Vernon-Roberts B, Pirie CJ. Degenerative changes in the intervertebral disks of the lumbar spine and their sequelae. Rheumatol Rehab 1977;16:13–21.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Macnab I. The traction spur: an indicator of segmental instability. J Bone Joint Surg 1971;53A:663–70.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Kozak JA, O’Brien JP. Simultaneous combined anterior and posterior fusion. An independent analysis of a treatment for the disabled low-back pain patient. Spine 1990;15(4):322–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Linson MA, Williams H. Anterior and combined anteroposterior fusion for lumbar disk pain. A preliminary study. Spine 1991;16(2):143–5.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Moore KR, Pinto MR, Butler LM. Degenerative disk disease treated with combined anterior and posterior arthrodesis and posterior instrumentation. Spine 2002; 27(15):1680–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Fritzell P, Hagg O, Wessberg P, Nordwall A. 2001 Volvo Award Winner in Clinical Studies: Lumbar fusion versus nonsurgical treatment for chronic low back pain: a mul-ticenter randomized controlled trial from the Swedish Lumbar Spine Study Group. Spine 2001;26(23):2521–32.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Schönmayr R, Busch C, Lotz C, Lotz-Metz G. Prosthetic disk nucleus implants: the Wiesbaden feasibility study. Two-years follow-up in ten patients. Riv Neuroradiol 1999;12(Suppl 1):163–70.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Katsuura A, Hukuda S, Saruhashi Y, Mori K. Kyphotic malalignment after anterior cervical fusion is one of the factors promoting the degenerative process in adjacent intervertebral levels. Eur Spine J 2001;10(4):320–4.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Kumar MN, Baklanov A, Chopin D. Correlation between sagittal plane changes and adjacent segment degeneration following lumbar spine fusion. Eur Spine J 2001; 10(4):314–19.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Balderston RA, Albert TJ, Mcintosh T, Wong L, Dolinskas C. Magnetic resonance imaging analysis of lumbar disk changes below scoliosis fusions. A prospective study. Spine 1998;23(1):54–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Danielsson AJ, Cederlund CG, Ekholm S, Nachemson AL. The prevalence of disk aging and back pain after fusion extending into the lower lumbar spine. A matched MR study twenty-five years after surgery for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Acta Radiol 2001; 42(2):187–97.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Kumar MN, Jacquot F, Hall H. Long-term follow-up of functional outcomes and radiographic changes at adjacent levels following lumbar spine fusion for degenerative disk disease. Eur Spine J 2001;10(4):309–13.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. La Grone MO. Loss of lumbar lordosis. A complication of spinal fusion for scoliosis. Orthop Clin North Am 1988;19(2):383–93.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Turner JA, Ersek M, Herron L, Haselkorn J, Kent D, Ciol MA, et al. Patient outcomes after lumbar spinal fusions. JAMA 1992;268(7):907–11.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Kostuik JP. Intervertebral disk replacement. In: Bridwell KH, DeWald RL, editors. The Textbook of Spinal Surgery. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven, 1997: 2257–66.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Lee CK, Langrana NA, Parsons JR, Zimmerman MC. Development of a prosthetic intervertebral disk. Spine 1991;16(Suppl 6):S253–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Ray CD, Schönmayr R, Kavanagh SA, Assell R. Prosthetic disk nucleus implants. Riv Neuroradiol 1999;12(Suppl 1):157–62.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Enker P, Steffee A, Mcmillan C, Keppler L, Biscup R, Miller S. Artificial disk replacement. Preliminary report with a 3-year minimum follow-up. Spine 1993;18: 1061–70.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Deiter MP. Toxicology and carcinogenesis studies of 2-mercaptobenzothiazole in F344/n rats and B6C3F mice. NIH Pub. No. 88–8, National Toxicology Program, Technical Report Series No. 322. Washington DC: US Department of Health and Human Services, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Hedman TP, Kostuik JP, Fernie GR, Hellier WG. Design of an intervertebral disk prosthesis. Spine 1991;16(Suppl 6):S256–60.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Fick R. Handbuch der Anatomie und Mechanik der Gelenke unter Berücksichtigung der bewegenden Muskeln, 1904–1911, Vol 3, Spezielle Gelenk- und Muskelmechanik. Gustav Fischer, Jena, 1911.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Lysell E. Motion in cervical spine. Acta Orthop Scand 1969;123:7.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Gonon GP, Dimnet J, Carret JP, Courcelles P, Fischer LP, De Mourgues G. Motion picture study of the lumbar spine and lateral inflexion in normal subjects and in patients. Rev Chir Orthop Réparatrice Appar Mot 1978;64(Suppl 2):101–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Louis R. Chirurgie du Rachis: Anatomie Chirurgicale et Voies d’Abord. Berlin: Springer, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  34. White A A, Panjabi MM. Clinical Biomechanics of the Spine. Philadelphia: Lippincott, 1978;534 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Marnay T. The Prodisk: clinical analysis of an intervertebral disk implant. In: Keach DL, Jinkins JR, editors. Spinal Restabilisation Procedures. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2002;273–82.

    Google Scholar 

  36. David TH. Lumbar disk prosthesis: a study of 85 patients reviewed after a minimum follow-up period of five years. Rachis Revue de Pathologie Vertébrale 1999; 11(4–5).

    Google Scholar 

  37. Griffith SL, Shelokov AP, Büttner-Janz K, LeMaire J-P, Zeegers WS. A multicenter retrospective study of the clinical results of the LINK® SB Charité intervertebral prosthesis. The initial European experience. Spine 1994;19:1842–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Lemaire JP, Skalli W, Lavaste F, et al. Intervertebral disk prosthesis. Results and prospects for the year 2000. Clin Orthop 1997;337:64–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Link HD. Link SB Charité III intervertebral dynamic disk spacer. Rachis Revue de Pathologie Vertébrale 1999;11.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. P. Tropiano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Th. Marnay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Service de Chirurgie Orthopédique et de Traumatologie, Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire Nord, Marseille Cedex 20, France

    Dominique G. Poitout MD (Professeur à l’Université de la Mediterranée, Chef de Service) (Professeur à l’Université de la Mediterranée, Chef de Service)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2004 Springer-Verlag London

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Tropiano, P., Marnay, T. (2004). Intervertebral Disk Prosthesis. In: Poitout, D.G. (eds) Biomechanics and Biomaterials in Orthopedics. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-3774-0_45

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-3774-0_45

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4471-3776-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-3774-0

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation