Biomechanical evaluation of CIBOR spine interbody fusion device

2016 ◽  
Vol 105 (5) ◽  
pp. 1157-1168
Author(s):  
Alexander C. M. Chong ◽  
Seth W. Harrer ◽  
Michael H. Heggeness ◽  
Paul H. Wooley
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Fusion Device ◽  
Biomechanical Evaluation ◽  
Interbody Fusion Device

Outcomes after cervical vertebral interbody fusion using an interbody fusion device and polyaxial pedicle screw and rod construct in 10 horses (2015‐2019)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lynn M. Pezzanite ◽  
Jeremiah T. Easley ◽  
Rosemary Bayless ◽  
Ellison Aldrich ◽  
Brad B. Nelson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Fusion Device ◽  
Interbody Fusion Device

scholarly journals Effectiveness comparison of Zero-profile interbody fusion implant and anterior cervical plate interbody fusion device: a clinical and radiological study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jun Zhang ◽  
Xiangyu Tang ◽  
Wei Xiong ◽  
Hua Wu ◽  
Chaoxu Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Neck Disability Index ◽  
Operation Time ◽  
Degenerative Changes ◽  
Adjacent Segment ◽  
Fusion Device ◽  
Cage Group ◽  
Cervical Plate ◽  
Anterior Cervical Plate ◽  
Interbody Fusion Device

Abstract Purpose This study was to compare the clinical outcomes, radiographic parameters, and complications of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with a Zero-profile implant (Zero-P) and traditional plate and cage. Methods There were 68 patients received ACDF of single level, 35 patients with Zero-profile implant (Zero-p group) and 33 patients with traditional plate and cage (Cage group), from C3–C7 during 2014 to 2016. Collecting and analyzing of clinical and radiological data were performed. Patients were followed-up at least 1 year after surgery. The operation time, blood loss, Japan Department of Orthopedics Association (JOA) score, pain Visual Analogue Score (VAS), Neck Disability Index (NDI) score and dysphagia score were recorded. Additionally, changes in cervical lordosis, fusion rate and adjacent segment degeneration were analyzed as well. Results For neurologic outcomes, the JOA, VAS and NDI were statistically equivalent between the two groups (P>0.05). For radiographic outcomes, there were no significant differences in the C2-7 Cobb angles, segmental Cobb angle and incidence of subsidence at the final follow-up (P>0.05). No degenerative changes was found in the Zero-p group, whereas 5 patients in the Cage group developed degeneration in adjacent segments (P<0.05). Also, the incidence of postoperative dysphagia is higher in Cage group than in Zero-p group at 3 months and 12 months (P<0.05). Conclusions Both Zero-profile implant and anterior cervical plate interbody fusion device were demonstrated to be effective and safe strategies in this study. Considering the lower incidences of dysphagia and degenerative changes, the Zero-profile implant is a good succedaneum.

Distractive Properties of a Threaded Interbody Fusion Device

Spine ◽  
1996 ◽  
Vol 21 (10) ◽  
pp. 1201-1210 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harvinder S. Sandhu ◽  
Simon Turner ◽  
J. Michael Kabo ◽  
Linda E. A. Kanim ◽  
David Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Fusion Device ◽  
Interbody Fusion Device

Development of a Bioresorbable Interbody Fusion Device

2000 ◽  
pp. 215-222
Author(s):  
Kai-Uwe Lewandrowski ◽  
Joseph D. Gresser ◽  
Debra J. Trantolo ◽  
Georg Schollmeier ◽  
Frank Kandziora ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Fusion Device ◽  
Interbody Fusion Device

A New Stand-Alone Cervical Anterior Interbody Fusion Device

Spine ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 156-160 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matti Scholz ◽  
Phillip M. Reyes ◽  
Philipp Schleicher ◽  
Anna G. U. Sawa ◽  
Seungwon Baek ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Fusion Device ◽  
Anterior Interbody Fusion ◽  
Interbody Fusion Device

Use of Bone as an Interbody Fusion Device

2001 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 110-118 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter A. Rasmussen ◽  
Gregory R. Trost ◽  
Clifford Tribus
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Fusion Device ◽  
Interbody Fusion Device

scholarly journals Effectiveness comparison of Zero-profile interbody fusion implant and anterior cervical plate interbody fusion device: a clinical and radiological study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jun Zhang ◽  
Xiangyu Tang ◽  
Wei Xiong ◽  
Hua Wu ◽  
Chaoxu Liu(Former Corresponding Author) ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Neck Disability Index ◽  
Degenerative Changes ◽  
Adjacent Segment ◽  
Postoperative Dysphagia ◽  
Fusion Device ◽  
Cage Group ◽  
Cervical Plate ◽  
Anterior Cervical Plate ◽  
Interbody Fusion Device

Abstract Background Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is a successful strategy to relieve the symptoms caused by cervical degenerative disease. Postoperative dysphagia is one complication of this kind of surgery. We performed this study to compare the clinical outcomes, radiographic parameters, and complications of　ACDF with a Zero-profile implant (Zero-P) and titanium plate and cage.Methods There were 68 patients received ACDF of single level, 35 patients with Zero-profile implant (Zero-p group) and 33 patients with traditional plate and cage (Cage group), from C3–C7 during 2014 to 2016. Collecting and analyzing of clinical and radiological data were performed. Patients were followed-up at least 1 year after surgery. The operation time, blood loss, Japan Department of Orthopedics Association (JOA) score, pain Visual Analogue Score (VAS), Neck Disability Index (NDI) score and dysphagia score were recorded. Additionally, changes in cervical lordosis, fusion rate and adjacent segment degeneration were analyzed as well.Results For neurologic outcomes, the JOA, VAS and NDI were statistically equivalent between the two groups (P>0.05). For radiographic outcomes, there were no significant differences in the C2-7 Cobb angles, segmental Cobb angle and incidence of subsidence at the final follow-up (P>0.05). No degenerative changes was found in the Zero-p group, whereas 5 patients in the Cage group developed degeneration in adjacent segments (P<0.05). Also, the incidence of postoperative dysphagia is higher in Cage group than in Zero-p group at 3 months and 12 months (P<0.05).Conclusions Both Zero-profile implant and anterior cervical plate interbody fusion device were demonstrated to be effective and safe strategies in this study. Considering the lower incidences of dysphagia and degenerative changes, the Zero-profile implant is a good succedaneum.

scholarly journals Bone Mineralization and Spinal Fusion Evaluation of a Truss-based Interbody Fusion Device

Spine ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Ali Kiapour ◽  
Howard B. Seim ◽  
Brent L. Atkinson ◽  
Peggy A. Lalor ◽  
Jon E. Block
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Fusion ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Bone Mineralization ◽  
Fusion Device ◽  
Interbody Fusion Device
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document