scholarly journals Motion Preservation and Shock Absorbing in Cervical and Lumbar Spine: A New Device for Anterior Cervical Arthroplasty, for Anterior or Posterior Lumbar Arthroplasty

10.5772/24577 ◽  
2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giuseppe Maida
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Cervical Arthroplasty ◽  
Motion Preservation ◽  
New Device

scholarly journals Two-level cervical arthroplasty using a “no-distraction” technique

2017 ◽  
Vol 42 (videosuppl1) ◽  
pp. V1
Author(s):  
Deshpande Rajakumar ◽  
Ankit Sharma ◽  
Akshay Hari ◽  
Subhas Konar ◽  
Murali Krishna
Keyword(s):  
Surgical Technique ◽  
Neck Pain ◽  
Vertebral Body ◽  
Degenerative Disease ◽  
Anterior Cervical Fusion ◽  
Cervical Fusion ◽  
Cervical Arthroplasty ◽  
Motion Preservation ◽  
Link Type

Cervical arthroplasty is being recognized as an emerging alternative to anterior cervical fusion with comparable or superior outcomes. The authors describe the surgical nuances of 2-level cervical arthroplasty in a case of 2-level degenerative disease. In this surgical technique, conventional vertebral body distraction has been avoided to prevent facet distraction, which can be a cause of persistent postoperative neck pain. Good motion preservation was observed at the 1-year follow-up examination.The video can be found here: https://youtu.be/YTpRVRXuZZk.

scholarly journals Optimal stiffness of a pedicle-screw-based motion preservation implant for the lumbar spine

2011 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 666-673 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonius Rohlmann ◽  
Thomas Zander ◽  
Georg Bergmann ◽  
Hadi N. Boustani
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Motion Preservation ◽  
Optimal Stiffness

Combinations of Biomechanical Metrics Involving Single and Multi Level Lumbar Posterior Dynamic Spinal Treatments

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Boyle C. Cheng ◽  
Daniel J. Cook ◽  
Matt Yeager ◽  
Bin Lu ◽  
Donald M. Whiting
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Dynamic Systems ◽  
Tissue Response ◽  
Motion Preservation ◽  
Fixation Devices ◽  
Biomechanical Parameters ◽  
Multi Level ◽  
New Devices

The subtle effects of motion preservation devices are comparatively more difficult to detect based wholly on the range of motion (RoM) parameter, despite the historical success in characterizing fixation devices. Additional approaches such as descriptive facet techniques, i.e., facet translations analysis, and newly defined metrics, i.e., interpedicular displacement (ID) must first be established, verified and standardized. Ideally, more complete biomechanical parameters would facilitate clinical understanding of specific new devices. The recent focus in our lab has been to measure the RoM in conjunction with other parameters, including ID, to more completely characterize a lumbar spine treated with a posterior dynamic systems (PDS). Furthermore, understanding the construct and which components dominate overall tissue response is important for PDS systems.

Loading of the lumbar spine during transition from standing to sitting: effect of fusion versus motion preservation at L4–L5 and L5–S1

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Avinash G. Patwardhan ◽  
J. Alex Sielatycki ◽  
Robert M. Havey ◽  
S. Craig Humphreys ◽  
Scott D. Hodges ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Motion Preservation

scholarly journals A new device for internal fixation of thoracolumbar and lumbar spine fractures: the ‘fixateur interne’

Spinal Cord ◽  
1985 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 225-232 ◽  
Author(s):  
W Dick ◽  
P Kluger ◽  
F Magerl ◽  
O Woersdörfer ◽  
G Zäch
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Internal Fixation ◽  
Fixateur Interne ◽  
Spine Fractures ◽  
New Device

Influence of nocturnal bruxism on the stomatognathic system. Part I: a new device for measuring mandibular movements during sleep

2001 ◽  
Vol 28 (10) ◽  
pp. 943-949 ◽  
Author(s):  
Y. Amemori ◽  
S. Yamashita ◽  
M. Ai ◽  
H. Shinoda ◽  
M. Sato ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
New Device ◽  
Stomatognathic System ◽  
System Part ◽  
Mandibular Movements

Impairment Tutorial: Recurrent Radioculpathy: Recurrent Radioculpathy and Apportionment

2002 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 8-10
Author(s):  
Christopher R. Brigham ◽  
Leon H. Ensalada
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Disk Herniation ◽  
Fourth Edition ◽  
Recurrent Injury ◽  
Injury Model ◽  
Whole Person ◽  
Spinal Region

Abstract Recurrent radiculopathy is evaluated by a different approach in the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides), Fifth Edition, compared to that in the Fourth Edition. The AMA Guides, Fifth Edition, specifies several occasions on which the range-of-motion (ROM), not the Diagnosis-related estimates (DRE) method, is used to rate spinal impairments. For example, the AMA Guides, Fifth Edition, clarifies that ROM is used only for radiculopathy caused by a recurrent injury, including when there is new (recurrent) disk herniation or a recurrent injury in the same spinal region. In the AMA Guides, Fourth Edition, radiculopathy was rated using the Injury Model, which is termed the DRE method in the Fifth Edition. Also, in the Fourth Edition, for the lumbar spine all radiculopathies resulted in the same impairment (10% whole person permanent impairment), based on that edition's philosophy that radiculopathy is not quantifiable and, once present, is permanent. A rating of recurrent radiculopathy suggests the presence of a previous impairment rating and may require apportionment, which is the process of allocating causation among two or more factors that caused or significantly contributed to an injury and resulting impairment. A case example shows the divergent results following evaluation using the Injury Model (Fourth Edition) and the ROM Method (Fifth Edition) and concludes that revisions to the latter for rating permanent impairments of the spine often will lead to different results compared to using the Fourth Edition.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document