The activL^® Artificial Disc: a next-generation motion-preserving implant for chronic lumbar discogenic pain

References

• DePalmaMJKetchumJMSaulloTWhat is the source of chronic low back pain and does age play a role?Pain Med201112222423321266006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LicciardoneJCThe epidemiology and medical management of low back pain during ambulatory medical care visits in the United StatesOsteopath Med Prim Care200821119025636
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• SchwarzerACAprillCNDerbyRFortinJKineGBogdukNThe prevalence and clinical features of internal disc disruption in patients with chronic low back painSpine19952017187818838560335
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ManchikantiLSinghVPampatiVEvaluation of the relative contributions of various structures in chronic low back painPain Physician20014430831616902676
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• CareyTSGarrettJMJackmanAMBeyond the good prognosis. Examination of an inception cohort of patients with chronic low back painSpine200025111512010647169
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• RhyneALSmithSEWoodKEDardenBVOutcome of unoperated discogram-positive low back painSpine19952018199720008578375
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Von KorffMStudying the natural history of back painSpine19941918 Suppl2041S2046S7801181
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• PengBFuXPangXProspective clinical study on natural history of discogenic low back pain at 4 years of follow-upPain Physician201215652553223159971
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MartinBIMirzaSKComstockBAGrayDTKreuterWDeyoRAAre lumbar spine reoperation rates falling with greater use of fusion surgery and new surgical technology?Spine200732192119212617762814
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greiner-PerthRBoehmHAllamYElsaghirHFrankeJReoperation rate after instrumented posterior lumbar interbody fusion: a report on 1680 casesSpine200429222516252015543064
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• St-PierreGHJackASiddiquiMMHendersonRLNatarajANon-fusion does not prevent adjacent segment disease: Dynesys long term outcomes with minimum five years follow-upSpine201641326527326335675
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LitricoSLonjonNRiouallonGAdjacent segment disease after anterior cervical interbody fusion: a multicenter retrospective study of 288 patients with long-term follow-upOrthop Traumatol Surg Res20141006 SupplS305S30925129704
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• JacobsWCvan der GaagNAKruytMCTotal disc replacement for chronic discogenic low back pain: a Cochrane reviewSpine2013381243622996268
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• RaoMJCaoSSArtificial total disc replacement versus fusion for lumbar degenerative disc disease: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trialsArch Orthop Trauma Surg2014134214915824323061
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• NieHChenGWangXZengJComparison of total disc replacement with lumbar fusion: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trialsJ Coll Physicians Surg Pak2015251606725604372
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WeiJSongYSunLLvCComparison of artificial total disc replacement versus fusion for lumbar degenerative disc disease: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trialsInt Orthop20133771315132523645003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• RenCSongYLiuLXueYAdjacent segment degeneration and disease after lumbar fusion compared with motion-preserving procedures: a meta-analysisEur J Orthop Surg Traumatol201424Suppl 1S245S25324728779
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Food and Drug AdministrationCHARITÉ™ Artificial Disc – P0400062004 Available from: http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/ProductsandMedicalProcedures/DeviceApprovalsandClearances/Recently-ApprovedDevices/ucm080693.htmAccessed September 26, 2015
   Google Scholar
• Food and Drug AdministrationPRODISC^®-L Total Disc Replacement – P0500102006 Available from: http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/ProductsandMedicalProcedures/DeviceApprovalsandClearances/Recently-ApprovedDevices/ucm077620.htmAccessed September 26, 2015
   Google Scholar
• Food and Drug AdministrationactivL^® Artificial Disc – P1200242015 Available from: http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/ProductsandMedicalProcedures/DeviceApprovalsandClearances/Recently-ApprovedDevices/ucm455656.htmAccessed September 26, 2015
   Google Scholar
• GarciaRYueJJBlumenthalSLumbar total disc replacement for discogenic low back pain: two-year outcomes of the activL multicenter randomized controlled IDE clinical trialSpine201540241873188126630435
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HanJSGoelVKAhnJYLoads in the spinal structures during lifting: development of a three-dimensional comprehensive biomechanical modelEur Spine J1995431531687552650
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• NachemsonAThe load on lumbar disks in different positions of the bodyClin Orthop Relat Res1966451071225937361
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• PanjabiMMWhiteAA3rdBasic biomechanics of the spineNeurosurgery19807176937413053
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• AdamsMADolanPHuttonWCPorterRWDiurnal changes in spinal mechanics and their clinical significanceJ Bone Joint Surg Br19907222662702138156
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• GruppTMYueJJGarciaRJrBiotribological evaluation of artificial disc arthroplasty devices: influence of loading and kinematic patterns during in vitro wear simulationEur Spine J20091819810819050942
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• NechtowWHintnerMBushelowMKaddickCIVD replacement mechanical performance depends strongly on input parameters52nd Annual Meeting of the Orthopaedic Research Society2006Chicago, IL
   Google Scholar
• American Academy of Orthopedic SurgeonsWhat modifications can be made to materials to improve wear behavior?WrightTMGood-manSBImplant Wear in Total Joint Replacement: Clinical and Biologic Issues, Material and Design ConsiderationsAmerican Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons2001
   Google Scholar
• NabhanAAl-YharyAIshakBSteudelWIKollmarOSteimerOAnalysis of spinal kinematics following implantation of lumbar spine disc prostheses versus fusion: radiological studyJ Long Term Eff Med Implants200717320721619023945
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• YueJJLong-term prospective randomized outcomes following lumbar total disc replacement: a single site experience with 6 years follow-upPaper presented at: ISASS16April 6, 20162016Las Vegas, NV
   Google Scholar
• BlumenthalSMcAfeePCGuyerRDA prospective, randomized, multicenter Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemptions study of lumbar total disc replacement with the CHARITE artificial disc versus lumbar fusion: part I: evaluation of clinical outcomesSpine2005301415651575 discussion E387-39116025024
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BergSTullbergTBranthBOlerudCTroppHTotal disc replacement compared to lumbar fusion: a randomised controlled trial with 2-year follow-upEur Spine J200918101512151919506919
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DelamarterRZiglerJEBalderstonRACammisaFPGoldsteinJASpivakJMProspective, randomized, multicenter Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption study of the ProDisc-L total disc replacement compared with circumferential arthrodesis for the treatment of two-level lumbar degenerative disc disease: results at twenty-four monthsJ Bone Joint Surg Am201193870571521398574
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DelamarterRBBaeHWPradhanBBClinical results of ProDisc-II lumbar total disc replacement: report from the United States clinical trialOrthop Clin North Am200536330131315950690
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• GornetMFBurkusJKDryerRFPelozaJHLumbar disc arthroplasty with Maverick disc versus stand-alone interbody fusion: a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter investigational device exemption trialSpine20113625E1600E161121415812
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ZiglerJDelamarterRSpivakJMResults of the prospective, randomized, multicenter Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption study of the ProDisc-L total disc replacement versus circumferential fusion for the treatment of 1-level degenerative disc diseaseSpine2007321111551162 discussion 116317495770
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• YoshiharaHYoneokaDNational trends in the surgical treatment for lumbar degenerative disc disease: United States, 2000 to 2009Spine J201515226527125281920
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SiepeCJHeiderFWiechertKHitzlWIshakBMayerMHMid- to long-term results of total lumbar disc replacement: a prospective analysis with 5- to 10-year follow-upSpine J20141481417143124448028
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LuSBHaiYKongCAn 11-year minimum follow-up of the Charite III lumbar disc replacement for the treatment of symptomatic degenerative disc diseaseEur Spine J20152492056206425895882
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DavidTLong-term results of one-level lumbar arthroplasty: minimum 10-year follow-up of the CHARITE artificial disc in 106 patientsSpine200732666166617413471
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• PettineKRyuRTechyFWhy lumbar artificial disc replacements (LADRs) failJ Spinal Disord Tech Epub2015626
   Google Scholar
• DeyoRACherkinDConradDVolinnECost, controversy, crisis: low back pain and the health of the publicAnnu Rev Public Health1991121411561828670
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ChinKREpidemiology of indications and contraindications to total disc replacement in an academic practiceSpine J20077439239817630136
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• GuyerRDGeislerFHBlumenthalSLMcAfeePCMullinBBEffect of age on clinical and radiographic outcomes and adverse events following 1-level lumbar arthroplasty after a minimum 2-year follow-upJ Neurosurg Spine20088210110718248280
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• YajunWYueZXiuxinHCuiCA meta-analysis of artificial total disc replacement versus fusion for lumbar degenerative disc diseaseEur Spine J20101981250126120364392
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar