Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Maverick total lumbar disk prosthesis: biomechanics and preliminary clinical results

  • Conference paper
Arthroplasty of the Spine

Abstract

The treatment of chronic low back pain due to advanced disk degeneration requires restabilization of the lumbar column, mainly by restoring disk function. Disk restabilization involves restoration and stabilization of the ligaments and annulus. Such restabilization represents a new concept [14, 29] in treating disk pathologies without the definitive loss of disk function [11, 13, 26]. Unlike fusion [20], the procedure is not definitive and makes it possible to restore function and mobility. Two prosthetic devices have now been on the market for about 10 years: the SB Charité [6, 8, 12, 15, 18, 27, 35], produced by Link, and the Prodisc [3, 30], manufactured by Spine Solution. This chapter looks at a new device, the Maverick disk prosthesis, which was developed according to biomechanical principles [21] and in the light of the biomechanical results obtained with the SB Charité and Prodisc. Preliminary results are promising.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aunoble S, Donkersloot P, Le Huec JC (2003) Dislocations with intervertebral disc prosthesis: two case reports. Eur Spine J (in press)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Allen et al (1997) The effects of particulate cobalt, chromium, and cobalt-chromium alloy on human osteoblast-like cells in vitro. J Bone Joint Surg Br 79:475–482

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Bertagnoli R, Kumar S (2002) Indications for full prosthetic disc arthroplasty: a correlation of clinical outcome against a variety of indications. Eur Spine J [Suppl 2]: 131–136

    Google Scholar 

  4. Burkus JK, Heim SE, Gornet MF, Zdeblick TA (2003) Is INFUSE bone graft superior to autograft bone? An integrated analysis of clinical trials using the LT-CAGE lumbar tapered fusion device. J Spinal Disord Tech 16:113–122

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Butler D, Trafimow JH, Andersson GB, et al (1990) Discs degenerate before facets. Spine 15:111–113

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Buttner-Janz K, Schellnack K, Zippel H (1989) Biomechanics of the SB Charité lumbar intervertebral disc endoprosthesis. Int Orthop 13:173–176

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Cavanaugh JM, Ozaktay AC, Yamashita HT, et al (1996) Lumbar facet pain: biomechanics, neuroanatomy and neurophysiology. J Biomech 29:1117–1129

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Cinotti G, David T, Postacchini F (1996) Results of disc prosthesis after a minimum follow-up period of 2 years. Spine 21:995–1000

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Cunningham BW, Lowery GL, Serhan HA, Dmitriev AE, Orbegoso CM, McAfee PC, Fraser RD, Ross RE, Kulkarni SS (2002) Total disc replacement arthroplasty using the acroflex lumbar disc: a non human primate model. Eur Spine J 11[Suppl 2]: 115–123

    Google Scholar 

  10. Dooris AP, Goel VK, Grosland NM, Gilbertson LG, Wilder DG (2001) Load sharing between anterior and posterior elements in a lumbar motion segment implanted with an artificial disc. Spine 26:122–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Eck JC, Humphreys SC, Hodges SD (1999) Adjacent-segment degeneration after lumbar fusion: a review of clinical, biomechanical, and radiologic studies. Am J Orthop 28:336–340

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Enker P, Steffee A, McMillin C, et al (1993) Artificial disc replacement: preliminary report with a 3-year minimum follow-up. Spine 18:1061–1070

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Ferstrom U (1996) Arthroplasty with intercorporal endoprosthesis in herniated disc and painful disc. Acta Orthop Scand 10[Suppl]:287–289

    Google Scholar 

  14. Frymoyer JW (1992) Indications for consideration of the artificial disc. In: Weinstein JN (ed) Clinical efficacy and outcome in the diagnosis and treatment of low back pain. Raven Press, New York, pp 227–236

    Google Scholar 

  15. Griffith SL, Shelokov AP, Buttner-Janz K, et al (1994) A multicenter retrospective study of the clinical results of the LINK SB Charité intervertebral prosthesis: the initial European experience. Spine 19:1842–1849

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Haynes D, Rogers S, Hay S, Pearcy M, Howie D (1993) The differences in toxicity and release of bone resorbing mediators induced by titanium and cobalt-chromium alloy wear particles. J Bone Joint Surg Am 75:825–834

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Hedman TP, Kostuik JP, Fernie GR, et al (1991) Design of an intervertebral disc prosthesis. Spine 16[Suppl]:256–260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Hochschuler SH, Ohnmeiss DD, Guyer RD, Blumenthal SL (2002) Artificial disc: preliminary results of a prospective study in the United States. Eur Spine J [Suppl 2]:106–110

    Google Scholar 

  19. Jacobs JJ, Skipor AK, Doom PF, et al (1996) Cobalt and chromium concentrations in patients with metal on metal total hip replacements. Clin Orthop [Suppl]:256–263

    Google Scholar 

  20. Katz JN (1995) Lumbar spinal fusion: surgical rates, costs, and complications. Spine 20[Suppl]:78–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Kostuik JP (1997) Intervertebral disc replacement: experimental study. Clin Orthop 27–41

    Google Scholar 

  22. Le Huec JC, Friesem T, Bertagnoli R, Mathews H (2002) Choice criteria for lumbar disc replacement indications. Presentation at the meeting of the Spine Arthroplasty Society, Montpellier

    Google Scholar 

  23. Le Huec JC, Kiaer T, Friesem T, Mathews H, Liu M, Eisermann L (2003) Shock absorption in lumbar disc prostheses, a preliminary mechanical study. J Spinal Disord Tech 16:346–351

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Le Huec, Aunoble S, Magendie J, Hadidane R (2003) Video-assisted anterior approach to the spine. In: Surgical techniques in orthopaedics and traumatology. Editions scientifiques et médicales Elsevier SAS, Paris, 55-060-D-10

    Google Scholar 

  25. Le Huec JC, Friesem T, Mathews H et al (2003) Histological analysis of effects of wear debris toxicity of chrome cobalt molybdenum alloy in epidural space in rabbit. Presentation at the meeting of the Spine Srthroplasty Society, Phoenix

    Google Scholar 

  26. Lee CK (1988) Accelerated degeneration of the segment adjacent to a lumbar fusion. Spine 13:375–377

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Lemaire JP, Skalli W, Lavaste F, et al (1997) Intervertebral disc prosthesis: results and prospects for the year 2000. Clin Orthop 337:64–76

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Mathews H, Le Huec JC, Bertagnoli R, Friesem T, Eisermann L (2002) Design rationale and early multicenter evaluation of Maverick total disk arthroplasty. Presented at the International Meeting on Advanced Spine Technologies, Montreux

    Google Scholar 

  29. Mayer HM, Korge A (2002) Non fusion tehnology in degenerative lumbar spinal disorders: facts, questions, challenges. Eur Spine J 11[Suppl 2]:85–91

    Google Scholar 

  30. Mayer HM, Wiechert K, Korge A, Qose I (2002) Minimally invasive total disc replacement: surgical technique and preliminary results. Eur Spine J 11[Suppl 2]: 124–130

    Google Scholar 

  31. Merritt K, Brown SA (1996) Distribution of cobalt chromium wear and corrosion products and biologic reactions. Clin Orthop [Suppl]:233–243.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Schmalzried TP, Jasty M, Harris WH (1992) Periprosthetic bone loss in total hip arthroplasty. Polyethylene wear debris and the concept of the effective joint space. J Bone Joint Surg Am 74: 849–863

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Van Ooij A (2002) Analysis of 21 patients with clinically failed Charité disc prosthesis. Eur Spine J [Suppl 1] Abstract 47

    Google Scholar 

  34. Willert H, Buchhorn G, Gobel D, et al (1996) Wear behavior and histopathology of classic cemented metal on metal hip endoprotheses. Clin Orthop 329[Suppl]: 160–186

    Google Scholar 

  35. Zeegers WS (1999) Bohnen LMLJ, Laaper M, et al (1999) Artificial disc replacement with the modular type SB Charité III: 2-year results in 50 prospectively studied patients. Eur Spine J 8:210–217

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Départment orthopédie Pr D Chauveaux, spine unit, CHU Pellegrin Tripode, 33076, Bordeaux cedex, France

    J. C. Le Huec & S. Aunoble

  2. University Hospital of North Tees, Nardwick, Stockton on Tees, TS 19 8PE, UK

    T. Friesem

  3. Mid-Atlantic Spine Specialists, 7650 Parham Road, Suite 200, Richmond, VA, 23294-4309, USA

    H. Mathews

  4. Madison school of medecine, Wisconsin, USA

    T. Zdeblick

Authors
  1. J. C. Le Huec
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S. Aunoble
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. T. Friesem
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. H. Mathews
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. T. Zdeblick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J. C. Le Huec .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Eeuwfeestkliniek, Harmoniestraat 68, 2018, Antwerp, Belgium

    Robert Gunzburg

  2. Orthopädische Klinik, München-Harlaching Wirbelsäulenzentrum, Harlachinger Str. 51, 81243, München, Germany

    Heinz Michael Mayer

  3. Centre Hospitalier Molière Longchamps, Rue Marconi 142, 1180, Brussels, Belgium

    Marek Szpalski

  4. Maurice E. Müller Institute for Evaluative Research and Documentation in Orthopaedic Surgery, Murtenstr. 35, 3008, Bern, Switzerland

    Max Aebi

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2004 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Le Huec, J.C., Aunoble, S., Friesem, T., Mathews, H., Zdeblick, T. (2004). Maverick total lumbar disk prosthesis: biomechanics and preliminary clinical results. In: Gunzburg, R., Mayer, H.M., Szpalski, M., Aebi, M. (eds) Arthroplasty of the Spine. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-18508-3_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-18508-3_8

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-20295-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-18508-3

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation