US 8,795,374 B2Grant
Prosthetic intervertebral discs that are implantable by minimally invasive surgical techniques and that have cores that are insertable in situ using end plate guideways
Issue Date:2014-08-05
•17 Claims
•4 Drawing Sheets
Abstract
The described devices are spinal implants that may be surgically implanted into the spine to replace damaged or diseased discs using a posterior approach. The discs are prosthetic devices that approach or mimic the physiological motion and reaction of the natural disc.
Metadata
Assignee
- Spinal Kinetics Inc.
Inventor
- Uriel Hiram Chee
Application Information
Application Number:US 12/060,850
Filing Date:2008-04-01
Priority Date:2007-04-01
Art Unit:3775
Classifications
IPC:
A61F2/44A61F2/46A61F2/30
Patent Drawings (4 sheets)
Description
Related Applications
[0001] This application derives benefit from U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/909,472, filed Apr. 1, 2007.
Field
[0002] The described devices are spinal implants that may be surgically implanted into the spine to replace damaged or diseased discs using a posterior approach. The discs are prosthetic devices that approach or mimic the physiological motion and reaction of the natural disc.
Background
[0003] The intervertebral disc is an anatomically and functionally complex joint. The intervertebral disc is composed of three component structures: (1) the nucleus pulposus; (2) the annulus fibrosus; and (3) the vertebral end plates. The biomedical composition and anatomical arrangements within these component structures are related to the biomechanical function of the disc.
[0004] The spinal disc may be displaced or damaged due to trauma or a disease process. If displacement or damage occurs, the nucleus pulposus may herniate and protrude into the vertebral canal or intervertebral foramen. Such deformation is known as herniated or slipped disc. A herniated or slipped disc may press upon the spinal nerve that exits the vertebral canal through the partially obstructed foramen, causing pain or paralysis in the area of its distribution.
[0005] To alleviate this condition, it may be necessary to remove the involved disc surgically and fuse the two adjacent vertebrae. In this procedure, a spacer is inserted in the place originally occupied by the disc and the spacer is secured between the neighboring vertebrae by the screws and plates or rods attached to the vertebrae. Despite the excellent short-term results of such a “spinal fusion” for traumatic and degenerative spinal disorders, long-term studies have shown that alteration of the biomechanical environment leads to degenerative changes particularly at adjacent mobile segments. The adjacent discs have increased motion and stress due to the increased stiffness of the fused segment. In the long term, this change in the mechanics of the motion of the spine causes these adjacent discs to degenerate.
[0006] Artificial intervertebral replacement discs may be used as an alternative to spinal fusion.
Summary
[0007] Prosthetic intervertebral discs and methods for using such discs are described. The subject prosthetic discs include an upper end plate, a lower end plate, and a compressible core member disposed between the two end plates. The compressible core may be introduced between the two end plates after the end plates have been placed in the intervertebral space formed after the natural disc has been removed. The described prosthetic discs have shapes, sizes, and other features that are particularly suited for implantation using minimally invasive surgical procedures, particularly from a posterior approach.
[0008] In one variation, the described prosthetic discs include top and bottom end plates separated by one or more compressible core members. The two plates may be held together by at least one fiber wound around at least one region of the top end plate and at least one region of the bottom end plate. The described discs may include integrated vertebral body fixation elements. When considering a lumbar disc replacement from the posterior access, the two plates are preferably elongated, having a length that is substantially greater than its width. Typically, the dimensions of the prosthetic discs range in height from 8 mm to 15 mm; the width ranges from 6 mm to 13 mm. The height of the prosthetic discs ranges from 9 mm to 11 mm. The widths of the disc may be 10 mm to 12 mm. The length of the prosthetic discs may range from 18 mm to 30 mm, perhaps 24 mm to 28 mm. Typical shapes include oblong, bullet-shaped, lozenge-shaped, rectangular, or the like
[0009] The described disc structures may be held together by at least one fiber wound around at least one region of the upper end plate and at least one region of the lower end plate. The fibers are generally high tenacity fibers with a high modulus of elasticity. The elastic properties of the fibers, as well as factors such as the number of fibers used, the thickness of the fibers, the number of layers of fiber windings in the disc, the tension applied to each layer, and the crossing pattern of the fiber windings enable the prosthetic disc structure to mimic the functional characteristics and biomechanics of a normal-functioning, natural disc.
[0010] A number of conventional surgical approaches may be used to place a pair of prosthetic discs. Those approaches include a modified posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) and a modified transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) procedures. We also describe apparatus and methods for implanting prosthetic intervertebral discs using minimally invasive surgical procedures. In one variation, the apparatus includes a pair of cannulae that are inserted posteriorly, side-by-side, to gain access to the spinal column at the disc space. A pair of prosthetic discs may then be implanted by way of the cannulae to be located between two vertebral bodies in the spinal column.
[0011] The prosthetic discs may be configured by selection of sizes and structures suitable for implantation by minimally invasive procedures.
[0012] Other and additional devices, apparatus, structures, and methods are described by reference to the drawings and detailed descriptions below.
Brief Description of the Drawings
[0013] The Figures contained herein are not necessarily drawn to scale. Some components and features may be exaggerated for clarity.
[0014] FIG. 1 shows a method for placement of prosthetic intervertebral discs using a posterior approach.
[0015] FIG. 2 is a perspective view of one variation of my prosthetic disc.
[0016] FIG. 3 is a perspective view of a core member insertable between end plates as a part of the variation of the prosthetic disc shown in FIG. 2 .
[0017] FIG. 4 is a side view of an insertion tool for my prosthetic disc.
[0018] FIG. 5 is a cross section, side view of one variation of an end plate.
[0019] FIG. 6 is a cross section, side view of the compressible core between two end plates as shown in FIG. 5 .
[0020] FIG. 7 is a cross section, side view of another variation of an end plate.
[0021] FIG. 8 is a cross section, side view of the compressible core between two end plates as shown in FIG. 7 .
[0022] FIGS. 9A and 9B schematically illustrate a method for extending an anchor into adjacent vertebral bone.
[0023] FIG. 10 schematically illustrate a method for implanting the described prosthetic discs.
Detailed Description
[0024] Described below are prosthetic intervertebral discs, methods of using such discs, apparatus for implanting such discs, and methods for implanting such discs. It is to be understood that the prosthetic intervertebral discs, implantation apparatus, and methods are not limited to the particular embodiments described, as these may, of course, vary. It is also to be understood that the terminology used here is only for the purpose of describing particular embodiments, and is not intended to be limiting in any way.
[0025] Insertion of the prosthetic discs may be approached using modified conventional procedures, such as a posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). In the modified PLIF procedure, the spine is approached via midline incision in the back. The erector spinae muscles are stripped bilaterally from the vertebral lamina at the required levels. A laminectomy is then performed to further allow visualization of the nerve roots. A partial facetectomy may also be performed to facilitate exposure. The nerve roots are retracted to one side and a discectomy is performed. Optionally, a chisel may then used to cut one or more grooves in the vertebral end plates to accept the fixation components on the prostheses. Appropriately-sized prostheses may then be inserted into the intervertebral space on either side of the vertebral canal.
[0026] In a modified TLIF procedure, the approach is also posterior, but differs from the PLIF procedure in that an entire facet joint is removed and the access is only on one side of the vertebral body. After the facetectomy, the discectomy is performed. Again, a chisel may be used to create on or more grooves in the vertebral end plates to cooperatively accept the fixation components located on each prosthesis. The prosthesis discs may then be inserted into the intervertebral space. One prosthesis may be moved to the contralateral side of the access and then a second prosthesis then inserted on the access side.
[0027] It should be apparent that we refer to these procedures as “modified” in that neither procedure is used to “fuse” the two adjacent vertebrae.
[0028] FIG. 1 shows a top, cross section view of a spine (100), sectioned across an intervertebral disc (102). This Figure depicts a minimally invasive surgical procedure for implanting a pair of intervertebral discs in an intervertebral region formed by the removal of a natural disc. This minimally invasive surgical implantation method is performed using a posterior approach, rather than the conventional anterior lumbar disc replacement surgery or the modified PLIF and TLIF procedures described above.
[0029] In FIG. 1 , two cannulae (104) are inserted posteriorly, through the skin (107), to provide access to the spinal column. More particularly, a small incision is made and a pair of access windows created through the lamina (106) of one of the vertebrae (108) on each side of the vertebral canal (110) to access the natural vertebral disc. The spinal cord (112) and nerve roots are avoided or moved to provide access. Once access is obtained, the two cannulae (104) are inserted. The cannulae (104) may be used as access passageways in removing the natural disc with conventional surgical tools. Alternatively, the natural disc may be removed prior to insertion of the cannulae. The cannulae are also used to introduce the prosthetic intervertebral discs (114) to the intervertebral region.
[0030] The described prosthetic discs are of a design and capability that they may be employed at more than one level, i.e., disc location, in the spine. Specifically, several natural discs may be replaced with my prosthetic discs. As will be described in greater detail below, each such level will be implanted with at least two of my discs. Kits, containing two of my discs for a single disc replacement or four of my discs for replacement of discs at two levels in the spine, perhaps with sterile packaging are contemplated. Such kits may also contain one or more cannulae having a central opening allowing passage and implantation of my discs.
[0031] Once the natural disc has been removed and the cannulae (104) located in place, a pair of prosthetic discs (114) is implanted between adjacent vertebral bodies. The prosthetic discs have a shape and size suitable making them suitable for use with (or adapted for) various minimally invasive procedures. The discs may have a shape such as the elongated one-piece prosthetic discs described below.
[0032] A prosthetic disc (114) is guided through each of the cannula such that each of the prosthetic discs (114) is implanted between the two adjacent vertebral bodies. The two prosthetic discs (114) may be located side-by-side and spaced slightly apart, as viewed from above. Optionally, prior to implantation, grooves may be formed on the internal surfaces of one or both of the vertebral bodies in order to engage anchoring components or features located on or integral with the prosthetic discs (114). The grooves may be formed using a chisel tool adapted for use with the minimally invasive procedure, i.e., adapted to extend through a relatively small access space (such as the tunnel-like opening found in through the cannulae) and to chisel the noted grooves within the intervertebral space present after removal of the natural disc.
[0033] These discs may be used as shown in FIG. 1 or, optionally, they may be implanted with an additional prosthetic disc or discs, perhaps in the position shown for auxiliary disc (116).
[0034] Additional prosthetic discs may also be implanted in order to obtain desired performance characteristics, and the implanted discs may be implanted in a variety of different relative orientations within the intervertebral space. In addition, the multiple prosthetic discs may each have different performance characteristics. For example, a prosthetic disc to be implanted in the central portion of the intervertebral space may be configured to be more resistant to compression than one or more prosthetic discs that are implanted nearer the outer edge of the intervertebral space. For instance, the stiffness of the outer discs (e.g., 114) may each be configured such that those outer discs exhibit approximately 5% to 80% of the stiffness of the central disc (116), perhaps in the range of about 30% to 60% of the central disc (116) stiffness. Other performance characteristics may be varied as well.
[0035] This description may describe a number of variations of prosthetic intervertebral discs. By “prosthetic intervertebral disc” is meant an artificial or manmade device that is so configured or shaped that it may be employed as a total or partial replacement of an intervertebral disc in the spine of a vertebrate organism, e.g., a mammal, such as a human. The described prosthetic intervertebral discs have dimensions that permit them, either alone or in combination with one or more other prosthetic discs, to substantially occupy the space between two adjacent vertebral bodies that is present when the naturally occurring disc between the two adjacent bodies is removed, i.e., a void disc space. By “substantially occupy” is meant that, in the aggregate, the discs occupy at least about 30% by surface area, perhaps at least about 80% by surface area or more. The subject discs may have a roughly bullet or lozenge shaped structure adapted to facilitate implantation by minimally invasive surgical procedures.
[0036] The discs may include both an upper (or top) and lower (or bottom) end plate, where the upper and lower end plates are separated from each other by a compressible element such as one or more core members, where the combination structure of the end plates and compressible element provides a prosthetic disc that functionally approaches or closely mimics a natural disc. The top and bottom end plates may be held together by at least one fiber attached to or wound around at least one portion of each of the top and bottom end plates. As such, the two end plates (or planar substrates) are held to each other by one or more fibers that are attached to or wrapped around at least one domain, portion, or area of the upper end plate and lower end plate such that the plates are joined to each other.
[0037] FIG. 2 shows a variation of my prosthetic intervertebral disc (200). This variation comprises an upper end plate (202) and a lower end plate (204) separated by a compressible core (206). As discussed below in more detail, the compressible core (206) may comprise one or more core members (not shown) and be bounded by one or more fibers (207) extending between the upper end plate (202) and the lower end plate (204). I also refer to the upper and lower end plates as the first and second end plates since the relative upper and lower positions of the end plates do not affect the operation of my discs. The upper and lower end plates (202, 204) may include apertures (208), through which the fibers (207) may pass. The shallow trough or depression (209) is used for direction of the insertable, compressible core (206) onto its final site from exterior to the end plate subcomponent assembly. Other components (woven or nonwoven fabrics, wires, etc.) may be used in functional substitution for the fibers (207). As may be apparent, this prosthetic disc is implanted in the following way: An “end plate subcomponent assembly,” a low profile assembly made up of the upper and lower end plates (202, 204) and the in-place fibers (207) and having the trough or guideway (209), is first placed in the intervertebral space. The compressible core (206) is then positioned in the guideway (209) and pushed into the space between the end plates (202, 204) thereby expanding the disc assembly in situ.
[0038] The discs may also include fibers (207) wound between and connecting the upper end plate (202) to the lower end plate (204). These fibers (207) may extend through a plurality of openings or apertures (208) formed on portions of each of the upper and lower end plates (202, 204). Thus, a fiber (207) extends between the pair of end plates (202, 204), and extends up through a first aperture (208) in the upper end plate (202) and back down through an adjacent aperture (208) in the upper end plate (202). The fibers (207) may not be tightly wound, thereby allowing a degree of axial rotation, bending, flexion, and extension by and between the end plates. The amount of axial rotation generally is in the range from about 0° to about 15°, perhaps from about 2° to 10°. The amount of bending generally has a range from about 0° to about 18°, perhaps from about 2° to 15°. The amount of flexion and extension generally has a range from about 0° to about 25°, perhaps from about 3° to 15°. Of course, the fibers (207) may be more or less tightly wound to vary the resultant values of these rotational values. An annular capsule may be included in the space between the upper and lower end plates (202, 204), surrounding the compressible core (206).
[0039] FIG. 3 is a perspective view of the insertable, compressible core (206) having an insertion support (210) that may be used in introducing the core (206) into the end plate subcomponent assembly after that subassembly has been introduced into an intervertebral space created when a natural disc has been removed.
[0040] FIG. 4 shows, in a schematic way, a combination of an insertion tool (214) and a collapsed end plate subcomponent assembly (216). The insertion tool (214) supports the upper and lower end plates (202, 204) via insertion into openings (211). The insertable disc (206), with its support member (210) is advanced into the collapsed end plate subcomponent assembly (216) by use of a screw (218). When the insertable disc (206) is fully advanced into the collapsed end plate subcomponent assembly (216), the full height disc (as shown in FIG. 2 ) is achieved.
[0041] Various profiles of end plates may be used to provide various final disc profiles. For instance, FIG. 5 shows a side view, cross section of an end plate (300) with a trough or runway (302) for passage of the compressible core to its final site.
[0042] FIG. 6 shows a side view, cross section of the final profile of a prosthetic disc (304) after insertion of the compressible core (306) between the two end plates (300). The final shape may be used to provide a specific lordotic or kyphotic angle to the disc (304) while preserving significant inter-end-plate spacing. The low profile, collapsed, end plate subcomponent assembly (216) also allows entry into the intervertebral space through small access openings as might be used with a posterior approach.
[0043] FIG. 7 shows, in cross section, side view, another profile of an end plate (308) also having a trough or route (310) for passage of the compressible core. FIG. 8 , in turn, shows, in cross-section, side view, the expanded profile of the resulting prosthetic disc (314). In this instance, the ramps are angled to provide a simple pathway for the compressible core (316) to its final site. The profile of the disc (314) has generally parallel surfaces facing the vertebrae.
[0044] The end plates may be planar substrates having a length of from about 12 mm to about 45 mm, such as from about 13 mm to about 44 mm, a width of from about 11 mm to about 28 mm, such as from about 12 mm to about 25 mm, and a thickness of from about 0.5 mm to about 5 mm, such as from about 1 mm to about 3 mm. The top and bottom end plates are fabricated or formed from a physiologically acceptable material that provides for the requisite mechanical properties, primarily structural rigidity and durability. Representative materials from which the end plates may be fabricated are known to those of skill in the art and include: metals such as titanium, titanium alloys, stainless steel, cobalt/chromium, etc.; plastics such as polyethylene with ultra high molar mass (molecular weight) (UHMW-PE), polyether ether ketone (PEEK), etc.; ceramics; graphite; etc.
[0045] The lateral, or horizontal, surface area of each of the end plates (202, 204)—i.e., the area of the disc surfaces that engage the vertebral bodies—is substantially larger than the cross-sectional surface area of the core member or members. The cross-sectional surface area of the core member or members may be from about 5% to about 80% of the cross-sectional area of a given end plate (202, 204), perhaps from about 10% to about 60%, or from about 15% to about 50%. In this way, for a given compressible core (206) having sufficient compression, flexion, extension, rotation, and other performance characteristics but having a relatively small cross-sectional size, the core member may be used to support end plates having a relatively larger cross-sectional size in order to help prevent subsidence into the vertebral body surfaces. In the variations described here, the compressible core (206) and end plates (202, 204) also have a size that is appropriate for or adapted for implantation by way of posterior access or minimally invasive surgical procedures, such as those described above.
[0046] FIGS. 9A and 9B provide a cross-section, side-view of an extendible anchoring feature (350) that is rotated into position by placement of the core member (352). The depicted anchor may rotate around a hinge-pin (354) or by mere placement of the anchor (350) in a properly shaped opening.
[0047] The surfaces of the upper and lower end plates, those surfaces in contact with and eventually adherent to the respective opposed bony surfaces of the upper and lower vertebral bodies, may have one or more anchoring or fixation components or mechanism (such as those discussed in respect to FIGS. 9A and 9B ) for securing those end plates to the vertebral bodies. For example, the anchoring feature may be one or more “keels,” a fin-like extension often having a substantially triangular cross-section and having a sequence of exterior barbs or serrations. This anchoring component is intended to cooperatively engage a mating groove that is formed on the surface of the vertebral body and to thereby secure the end plate to its respective vertebral body. The serrations enhance the ability of the anchoring feature to engage the vertebral body.
[0048] Further, this “keel” variation of the anchoring component may include one or more holes, slots, ridges, grooves, indentations, or raised surfaces to further assist in anchoring the disc to the associated vertebra. These physical features will so assist by allowing for bony ingrowth. Each end plate may have a different number of anchoring components, and those anchoring features may have a different orientation on each end plate. The number of anchoring features generally ranges in number from about 0 to about 500, perhaps from about 1 to 10. Alternatively, another fixation or anchoring mechanism may be used, such as ridges, knurled surfaces, serrations, or the like. In some variations, the discs will have no external fixation mechanism. In such variations, the discs are held in place laterally by the friction forces between the disc and the vertebral bodies.
[0049] Further, each of the described variations may additionally include a porous covering or layer (e.g., sprayed Ti metal) allowing boney ingrowth and may include some osteogenic materials.
[0050] FIG. 10 , step (a), shows placement of a collapsed end plate subcomponent assembly (400) into the intervertebral space (402) between an upper vertebra (404) and the adjacent lower vertebra (406). The placement tool has been omitted for clarity. The end plate subcomponent assembly (400) has been passed through the cannula (410) to the implantation site. The insertable core (412) is shown approaching the end plate subcomponent assembly (400).
[0051] FIG. 10 , step (b), shows the implanted disc (416) after expansion. The cannula (410) and the core placement tool (418) are being removed.
[0052] Each of the described prosthetic discs depicted in the Figures has a greater length than width. The aspect ratio (length:width) of the discs may be about 1.5 to 5.0, perhaps about 2.0 to 4.0, or about 2.5 to 3.5. Exemplary shapes to provide these relative dimensions include rectangular, oval, bullet-shaped, lozenge-shaped, and others. These shapes facilitate implantation of the discs by the minimally invasive procedures described above.
[0053] As noted above, in the variations shown herein, the upper end plate and lower end plate may each contain a plurality of apertures through which the fibers may be passed through or wound, as shown. The actual number of apertures contained on an end plate is variable. Increasing the number of apertures allows an increase in the circumferential density of the fibers holding the end plates together. The number of apertures may range from about 3 to 100, perhaps in the range of 10 to 30. In addition, the shape of the apertures may be selected so as to provide a variable width along the length of the aperture. For example, the width of the apertures may taper from a wider inner end to a narrow outer end, or visa versa. Additionally, the fibers may be wound multiple times within the same aperture, thereby increasing the radial density of the fibers. In each case, this improves the wear resistance and increases the torsional and flexural stiffness of the prosthetic disc, thereby further approximating natural disc stiffness. In addition, the fibers may be passed through or wound on each aperture, or only on selected apertures, as needed. The fibers may be wound in a uni-directional manner, where the fibers are wound in the same direction, e.g., clockwise, which closely mimics natural annular fibers found in a natural disc, or the fibers may be wound bi-directionally. Other winding patterns, both single and multi-directional, may also be used.
[0054] The apertures provided in the various end plates discussed here, may be of a number of shapes. Such aperture shapes include slots with constant width, slots with varying width, openings that are substantially round, oval, square, rectangular, etc. Elongated apertures may be radially situated, circumferentially situated, spirally located, or combinations of these shapes. More than one shape may be utilized in a single end plate.
[0055] One purpose of the fibers is to hold the upper and lower end plates together and to limit the range-of-motion to mimic or at least to approach the range-of-motion of a natural disc. The fibers may comprise high tenacity fibers having a high modulus of elasticity, for example, at least about 100 MPa, perhaps at least about 500 MPa. By high tenacity fibers is meant fibers able to withstand a longitudinal stress of at least 50 MPa, and perhaps at least 250 MPa, without tearing. The fibers 207 are generally elongate fibers having a diameter that ranges from about 100 μm to about 1000 μm, and preferably about 200 μm to about 400 μm. The fibrous components may be single strands or, more typically, multi-strand assemblages. Optionally, the fibers may be injection molded or otherwise coated with an elastomer to encapsulate the fibers, thereby providing protection from tissue ingrowth and improving torsional and flexural stiffness. The fibers may be coated with one or more other materials to improve fiber stiffness and wear. Additionally, the core may be injected with a wetting agent such as saline to wet the fibers and facilitate the mimicking of the viscoelastic properties of a natural disc. The fibers may comprise a single or multiple component fibers.
[0056] The fibers may be fabricated from any suitable material. Examples of suitable materials include polyesters (e.g., Dacron® or the Nylons), polyolefins such as polyethylene, polypropylene, low-density and high density polyethylenes, linear low-density polyethylene, polybutene, and mixtures and alloys of these polymers. HDPE and UHMWPE are especially suitable. Also suitable are various polyaramids, poly-paraphenylene terephthalamide (e.g., Kevlar®), carbon or glass fibers, various stainless steels and superelastic alloys (such as nitinol), polyethylene terephthalate (PET), acrylic polymers, methacrylic polymers, polyurethanes, polyureas, other polyolefins (such as polypropylene and other blends and olefinic copolymers), halogenated polyolefins, polysaccharides, vinylic polymers, polyphosphazene, polysiloxanes, liquid crystal polymers such as those available under the tradename VECTRA, polyfluorocarbons such as polytetrafluoroethylene and e-PTFE, and the like.
[0057] The fibers may be terminated on an end plate in a variety of ways. For instance, the fiber may be terminated by tying a knot in the fiber on the superior or inferior surface of an end plate. Alternatively, the fibers may be terminated on an end plate by slipping the terminal end of the fiber into an aperture on an edge of an end plate, similar to the manner in which thread is retained on a thread spool. The aperture may hold the fiber with a crimp of the aperture structure itself, or by an additional retainer such as a ferrule crimp. As a further alternative, tab-like crimps may be machined into or welded onto the end plate structure to secure the terminal end of the fiber. The fiber may then be closed within the crimp to secure it. As a still further alternative, a polymer may be used to secure the fiber to the end plate by welding, including adhesives or thermal bonding. That terminating polymer may be of the same material as the fiber (e.g., UHMWPE, PE, PET, or the other materials listed above). Still further, the fiber may be retained on the end plates by crimping a cross-member to the fiber creating a T-joint, or by crimping a ball to the fiber to create a ball joint.
[0058] The core members provide support to and maintain the relative spacing between the upper and lower end plates. The core members may comprise one or more relatively compliant materials. In particular, the compressible core members in this variation and the others discussed herein, may comprise a thermoplastic elastomer (TPE) such as a polycarbonate-urethane TPE having, e.g., a Shore value of 50 D to 60 D, e.g. 55 D. An example of such a material is the commercially available TPE, BIONATE. Shore hardness is often used to specify flexibility or flexural modulus for elastomers.
[0059] We have had success with core members comprising TPE that are compression molded at a moderate temperature from an extruded plug of the material. For instance, with the polycarbonate-urethane TPE mentioned above, a selected amount of the polymer is introduced into a closed mold upon which a substantial pressure may be applied, while heat is applied. The TPE amount is selected to produce a compression member having a specific height. The pressure is applied for 8-15 hours at a temperature of 70°-90° C., typically about 12 hours at 80° C.
[0060] Other examples of suitable representative elastomeric materials include silicone, polyurethanes, or polyester (e.g., Hytrel®).
[0061] Compliant polyurethane elastomers are discussed generally in, M. Szycher, J. Biomater. Appl. “Biostability of polyurethane elastomers: a critical review”, 3(2):297 402 (1988); A. Coury, et al., “Factors and interactions affecting the performance of polyurethane elastomers in medical devices”, J. Biomater. Appl. 3(2):130 179 (1988); and Pavlova M, et al., “Biocompatible and biodegradable polyurethane polymers”, Biomaterials 14(13):1024 1029 (1993). Examples of suitable polyurethane elastomers include aliphatic polyurethanes, segmented polyurethanes, hydrophilic polyurethanes, polyether-urethane, polycarbonate-urethane, and silicone-polyether-urethane.
[0062] Other suitable elastomers include various polysiloxanes (or silicones), copolymers of silicone and polyurethane, polyolefins, thermoplastic elastomers (TPE's) such as atactic polypropylene, block copolymers of styrene and butadiene (e.g., SBS rubbers), polyisobutylene, and polyisoprene, neoprene, polynitriles, artificial rubbers such as produced from copolymers produced of 1-hexene and 5-methyl-1,4-hexadiene.
[0063] One variant of the construction for the core member comprises a nucleus formed of a hydrogel and an elastomer reinforced fiber annulus.
[0064] For example, the nucleus, the central portion of the core member, may comprise a hydrogel material. Hydrogels are water-swellable or water-swollen polymeric materials typically having structures defined either by a crosslinked or an interpenetrating network of hydrophilic homopolymers or copolymers. In the case of physical crosslinking, the linkages may take the form of entanglements, crystallites, or hydrogen-bonded structures to provide structure and physical integrity to the polymeric network.
[0065] Suitable hydrogels may be formulated from a variety of hydrophilic polymers and copolymers including polyvinyl alcohol, polyethylene glycol, polyvinyl pyrrolidone, polyethylene oxide, polyacrylamide, polyurethane, polyethylene oxide-based polyurethane, and polyhydroxyethyl methacrylate, and copolymers and mixtures of the foregoing.
[0066] Silicone-base hydrogels are also suitable. Silicone hydrogels may be prepared by polymerizing a mixture of monomers including at least one silicone-containing monomer and or oligomer and at least one hydrophilic co-monomer such as N-vinyl pyrrolidone (NVP), N-vinylacetamide, N-vinyl-N-methyl acetamide, N-vinyl-N-ethyl acetamide, N-vinylformamide, N-vinyl-N-ethyl formamide, N-vinylformamide, 2-hydroxyethyl-vinyl carbonate, and 2-hydroxyethyl-vinyl carbamate (beta-alanine).
[0067] The annulus may comprise an elastomer, such as those discussed just above, reinforced with a fiber.
[0068] The shape of each of the core members may be cylindrical or have an oval cross section, although the shape (as well as the materials making up the core member and the core member size) may be varied to obtain desired physical or performance properties. For example, the core member's shape, size, and materials will directly affect the degree of flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation of the prosthetic disc.
[0069] Where a range of values is provided, it is understood that each intervening value within the range, to the tenth of the unit of the lower limit (unless the context clearly dictates otherwise), between the upper and lower limit of that range and any other stated or intervening value in that stated range is described. The upper and lower limits of these smaller ranges may independently be included in the smaller ranges is also described, subject to any specifically excluded limit in the stated range. Where the stated range includes one or both of the limits, ranges excluding either or both of those included limits are also described.
[0070] Unless defined otherwise, all technical and scientific terms used herein have the same meaning as commonly understood by one of ordinary skill in the medical devices art. Although methods and materials similar or equivalent to those described here may also be used in the practice or testing of the described devices and methods, the preferred methods and materials are described in this document. All publications mentioned herein are incorporated herein by reference to disclose and describe the methods and/or materials in connection with which the publications are cited.
[0071] It must be noted that as used herein and in the appended claims, the singular forms “a”, “an”, and “the” include plural referents unless the context clearly dictates otherwise.
[0072] As will be apparent to those of skill in the art upon reading this disclosure, each of the individual variations described and illustrated herein has discrete components and features which may be readily separated from or combined with the features of any of the other several embodiments without departing from the scope or spirit of this disclosure. For example, and without limitation, several of the variations described here include descriptions of anchoring features, protective capsules, fiber windings, and protective covers covering exposed fibers for integrated end plates. It is expressly contemplated that these features may be incorporated (or not) into those variations in which they are not shown or described.
[0073] All patents, patent applications, and other publications mentioned herein are hereby incorporated herein by reference in their entireties. The patents, applications, and publications discussed herein are provided solely for their disclosure prior to the filing date of the present application. Nothing herein is to be construed as an admission that contents of those patents, applications, and publications are “prior” as that term is used in the Patent Law.
[0074] The preceding merely illustrates the principles of the invention. It will be appreciated that those skilled in the art will be able to devise various arrangements which, although not explicitly described or shown herein, embody the principles otherwise described here and are included within its spirit and scope. Furthermore, all examples and conditional language recited herein are principally intended to aid the reader in understanding the described principles of my devices and methods. Moreover, all statements herein reciting principles, aspects, and variation as well as specific examples thereof, are intended to encompass both structural and functional equivalents. Additionally, it is intended that such equivalents include both currently known equivalents and equivalents developed in the future, i.e., any elements developed that perform the same function, regardless of structure.
Claims
What is claimed is:
1. A prosthetic intervertebral disc, comprising:
a first end plate having a first exterior edge and having an angled ramp comprising a trough and extending inwardly from the first exterior edge and configured for accepting and contacting an insertable compressible core at the exterior edge and for positioning the insertable compressible core on a flat region between the first end plate and a second end plate after the first end plate has been inserted in an intervertebral space;
the second end plate having a second exterior edge and having an angled ramp comprising a trough and extending inwardly from the second exterior edge and configured for accepting and contacting the insertable compressible core and for positioning the insertable compressible core on the flat region between the first end plate and the second end plate after the second end plate has been inserted in an intervertebral space;
the insertable compressible core consisting essentially of a member selected from the group consisting of elastomers and hydrogels;
at least one fiber extending between and engaged with the first and second end plates; and
wherein said end plates are held together by said at least one fiber.
2. The prosthetic intervertebral disc of claim 1 wherein the insertable compressible core is positioned between the first and second end plates.
3. The prosthetic intervertebral disc of claim 1 wherein the disc is bullet-shaped.
4. The prosthetic intervertebral disc of claim 1 wherein the disc is lozenge-shaped.
5. A kit for surgically replacing a disc in a spine with a posterior approach, comprising exactly two of the prosthetic discs of claim 1.
7. The kit of claim 5 wherein the first and second end plates of each of the prosthetic discs have a length and a width, and wherein the length is greater than the width.
8. The kit of claim 5 wherein the first and second end plates of each of the prosthetic discs have a length:width aspect ratio of the first and second end plates is in the range of about 1.5:1 to 5.0:1.
9. The prosthetic intervertebral disc of claim 1, wherein the at least one fiber is engaged with the first and second end plates because the at least one fiber is wound around at least one portion of the first end plate and at least one portion of the second end plate.
10. A prosthetic intervertebral disc, comprising:
a first end plate with a first side having a first guideway configured to contact and to accept an insertable compressible core and to allow positioning of the insertable compressible core between the first end plate and a second end plate after the first end plate has been inserted in an intervertebral space, the first end plate having a first angled surface on a side opposite that having the first guideway;
the second end plate having a second guideway configured to contact and to accept the insertable compressible core and to allow positioning of the insertable compressible core between the first end plate and the second end plate after the second end plate has been inserted in an intervertebral space, the second end plate having a second angled surface on a side opposite that having the second guideway, wherein the first and second angled surfaces together provide a lordotic or kyphotic angle to the disc when the core is positioned between the first and second end plates;
the insertable compressible core consisting essentially of a member selected from the group consisting of elastomers and hydrogels;
at least one fiber extending between and engaged with the first and second end plates; and
wherein said end plates are held together by said at least one fiber.
11. The prosthetic intervertebral disc of claim 10, configured such that insertion of the compressible core along the first and second guideways thereby causes expansion of the disc.
12. The prosthetic intervertebral disc of claim 10 wherein the insertable compressible core is positioned between the first and second end plates.
13. A prosthetic intervertebral disc, comprising:
a first end plate having a first guideway configured to contact and to accept an insertable compressible core and to allow insertion of the compressible core along a first flat region of the first end plate into a final position between the first end plate and a second end plate after the first end plate has been inserted in an intervertebral space;
the second end plate having a second guideway configured to contact and to accept the insertable compressible core and to allow insertion of the compressible core along a second flat region of the second end plate into a final position between the first end plate and a second end plate after the first end plate has been inserted in an intervertebral space;
the insertable compressible core consisting essentially of a member selected from the group consisting of elastomers and hydrogels;
at least one fiber extending between and engaged with the first and second end plates; and
wherein said end plates are held together by said at least one fiber.
14. The prosthetic intervertebral disc of claim 13, wherein the first guideway is a depression in the first end plate.
15. The prosthetic intervertebral disc of claim 14, wherein the second guideway is a depression in the second end plate.
16. The prosthetic intervertebral disc of claim 13, configured such that insertion of the compressible core along the first and second guideways thereby causes expansion of the disc.
17. The prosthetic intervertebral disc of claim 13 wherein the insertable compressible core is positioned between the first and second end plates.
Patent Citations (11)
| Patent | Date | Inventor | Cited By |
|---|---|---|---|
| US3867728(A) | 1975-02-01 | Stubstad | Applicant |
| US4932969(A) | 1990-06-01 | Frey et al. | Applicant |
| US5071437(A) | 1991-12-01 | Steffee | Applicant |
| US5171281(A) | 1992-12-01 | Parsons et al. | Applicant |
| US5370697(A) | 1994-12-01 | Baumgartner | Applicant |
| US6626943(B2) | 2003-09-01 | Eberlin et al. | Applicant |
| US6645248(B2) | 2003-11-01 | Casutt | Applicant |
| US6733532(B1) | 2004-05-01 | Gauchet et al. | Applicant |
| US7563284(B2) | 2009-07-01 | Coppes et al. | Applicant |
| US2005/0113916(A1) | 2005-05-01 | Branch, Jr. | Examiner |
| US2005/0228500(A1) | 2005-10-01 | Kim et al. | Examiner |
Non-Patent Literature (66)
- U.S. Appl. No. 60/403,356, filed Aug. 15, 2002.Applicant
- U.S. Appl. No. 60/403,402, filed Aug. 15, 2002.Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Preliminary Invalidity Contentions (USDC, Case No. 5:09-cv-01201, Synthes USA et al. v. Spinal Kinetics, Inc., Sep. 8, 2009).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 1 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Stubstad USP 3,867,728).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 2 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Baumgartner USP 5,370,697 in view of Stubstad USP 3,867,728 and Steffee USP 5,071,437).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 3 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Baumgartner USP 5,370,697 in view of Stubstad USP 3,867,728 and Parsons USP 5,171,281).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 4 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Baumgartner USP 5,370,697 in view of Stubstad USP 3,867,728 and Eberlein USP 6,626,943).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 5 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Baumgartner USP 5,370,697 in view of Stubstad USP 3,867,728 and Casutt USP 6,645,248).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 6 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Baumgartner USP 5,370,697 in view of Stubstad USP 3,867,728 and Frey USP 4,932,969).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 7 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Baumgartner USP 5,370,697 in view of Stubstad USP 3,867,728 and Gauchet USP 6,733,532).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 8 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Baumgartner USP 5,370,697 in view of Stubstad USP 3,867,728 and Development and Characterization of a Prosthetic Intervertebral Disc, Robert Hudgins, Georgia Inst. of Tech., Nov. 1998).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 9 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Stubstad USP 3,867,728 in view of Baumgartner USP 5,370,697).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 10 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Baumgartner USP 5,370,697 in view of Stubstad USP 3,867,728 and Steffe USP 4,071,437).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 11 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Baumgartner USP 5,370,697 in view of Stubstad USP 3,867,728 and Casutt USP 6,645,248).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 12 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Stubstad USP 3,867,728 in view of Development and Characterization of a Prosthetic Intervertebral Disc, Robert Hudgins, Georgia Inst. of Tech., Nov. 1998).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Preliminary Invalidity Contentions [Amended] (USDC, Case No. 5:09-cv-01201, Synthes USA et al. v. Spinal Kinetics, Inc., Dec. 28, 2009).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Preliminary Invalidity Contentions [Amended]—Exhibit 1 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Stubstad USP 3,867,728).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Preliminary Invalidity Contentions [Amended]—Exhibit 2 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Coppes USP 7,563,284).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Preliminary Invalidity Contentions [Amended]—Exhibit 3 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Coppes USP 7,563,284 in combination with Stubstad USP 3,867,728).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Preliminary Invalidity Contentions [Amended]—Exhibit 4 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Baumgartner USP 5,370,697 in view of Stubstad USP 3,867,728 and Steffee USP 5,071,437).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Preliminary Invalidity Contentions [Amended]—Exhibit 5 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Baumgartner USP 5,370,697 in view of Stubstad USP 3,867,728 and Parsons USP 5,171,281).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Preliminary Invalidity Contentions [Amended]—Exhibit 6 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Baumgartner USP 5,370,697 in view of Stubstad USP 3,867,728 and Eberlein USP 6,626,943).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Preliminary Invalidity Contentions [Amended]—Exhibit 7 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Baumgartner USP 5,370,697 in view of Stubstad USP 3,867,728 and Casutt USP 6,645,248).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Preliminary Invalidity Contentions [Amended]—Exhibit 8 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Baumgartner USP 5,370,697 in view of Stubstad USP 3,867,728 and Frey USP 4,932,969).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Preliminary Invalidity Contentions [Amended]—Exhibit 9 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Baumgartner USP 5,370,697 in view of Stubstad USP 3,867,728 and Gauchet USP 6,733,532).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Preliminary Invalidity Contentions [Amended]—Exhibit 10 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Baumgartner USP 5,370,697 in view of Stubstad USP 3,867,728 and Development and Characterization of a Prosthetic Intervertebral Disc, Hudgins, Georgia Inst. of Tech., Nov. 1998).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Preliminary Invalidity Contentions [Amended]—Exhibit 11 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Stubstad USP 3,867,728 in view of Baumgartner USP 5,370,697).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Preliminary Invalidity Contentions [Amended]—Exhibit 12 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Baumgartner USP 5,370,697 in view of Stubstad USP 3,867,728 and Steffee USP 4,071,437).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Preliminary Invalidity Contentions [Amended]—Exhibit 13 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Baumgartner USP 5,370,697 in view of Stubstad USP 3,867,728 and Casutt USP 6,645,248).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Preliminary Invalidity Contentions [Amended]—Exhibit 14 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Stubstad USP 3,867,728 in view of Development and Characterization of a Prosthetic Intervertebral Disc, Hudgins, Georgia Inst. of Tech., Nov. 1998).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Second Amended Preliminary Invalidity Contentions (USDC, Case No. 5:09-cv-01201, Synthes USA et al. v. Spinal Kinetics, Inc., Sep. 30, 2010).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Second Amended Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 1 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Neuentwicklung eines Implantates für den totalen Bandschiebenersatz, Vorgelegt von: Adrian Burn und Daniel Baumgartner Im Rahmen des Studiums für “Maschinenbau und Vergahrenstechnik” an der Eidgenöossischen Technischen Hochschule Zürich, im Feb. 2002).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Second Amended Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 2 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Neuentwicklung eines lumbalen bewegungserhaltenden Bandscheibenimplantates, Feb. 25, 2002).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Second Amended Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 3 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Stubstad USP 3,867,728).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Second Amended Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 4 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Baumgartner PCT/CH2003/00247).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Second Amended Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 5 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Neuentwicklung eines Implantates für den totalen Bandschiebenersatz, Vorgelegt von: Adrian Burri und Daniel Baumgartner Im Rahmen des Studiums für “Maschinenbau und Vergahrenstechnik” an der Eidgenöossischen Technischen Hochschule Zürich, im Feb. 2002).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Second Amended Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 6 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Neuentwicklung eines Implantates für den totalen Bandschiebenersatz, Vorgelegt von: Adrian Burn und Daniel Baumgartner Im Rahmen des Studiums für “Maschinenbau und Vergahrenstechnik” an der Eidgenöossischen Technischen Hochschule Zürich, im Feb. 2002).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Second Amended Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 7 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Stubstad USP 3,867,728 in view of Eberlein USP 6,626,943).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Second Amended Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 8 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Stubstad 3,867,728 in view of Kim USP 7,153,325).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Second Amended Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 9 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Stubstad USP 3,867,728 in view of Optimal Design of Synthetic Intervertebral Disc Prosthesis Considering Nonlinear Mechanical Behavior, Kweon et al., Dec. 20, 2001).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Second Amended Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 10 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Stubstad 3,867,728 in view of Development and Characterization of a Prosthetic Intervertebral Disc, Hudgins, Georgia Inst. of Tech., Nov. 1998).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Second Amended Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 11 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Coppes USP 7,563,284 to Stubstad USP 3,867,728).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Second Amended Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 12 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Coppes USP 7,563,284 in view of Eberlein USP 6,626,943).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Second Amended Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 13 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Coppes USP 7,563,284 in view of Kim USP 7,153,325).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Second Amended Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 14 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Coppes USP 7,563,284 in view of Optimal Design of Synthetic Intervertebral Disc Prosthesis Considering Nonlinear Mechanical Behavior, Kweon et al., Dec. 20, 2001).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Second Amended Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 15 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Coppes USP 7,563,284 in view of Development and Characterization of a Prosthetic Intervertebral Disc, Hudgins, Georgia Inst. of Tech., Nov. 1998).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Second Amended Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 16 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Baumgartner USP 5,370,697 in view of Stubstad USP 3,867,728).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Second Amended Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 17 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Baumgartner USP 5,370,697 in view of Eberlein USP 6,626,943).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Second Amended Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 18 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Baumgartner USP 5,370,697 in view of Kim USP 7,153,325).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Second Amended Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 19 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Baumgartner USP 5,370,697 in view of Optimal Design of Synthetic Intervertebral Disc Prosthesis Considering Nonlinear Mechanical Behavior, Kweon et al., Dec. 20, 2001).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Second Amended Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 20 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Baumgartner USP 5,370,697 in view of Development and Characterization of a Prosthetic Intervertebral Disc, Hudgins, Georgia Inst. of Tech., Nov. 1998).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Second Amended Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 21 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Gauchet USP 6,733,532 in view of Stubstad USP 3,867,728).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Second Amended Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 22 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Gauchet USP 6,733,532 in view of Eberlein USP 6,626,943).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Second Amended Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 23 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Gauchet USP 6,733,532 in view of Kim USP 7,153,325).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Second Amended Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 24 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Gauchet USP 6,733,532 in view of Optimal Design of Synthetic Intervertebral Disc Prosthesis Considering Nonlinear Mechanical Behavior, Kweon et al., Dec. 20, 2001).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Second Amended Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 25 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Gauchet USP 6,733,532 in view of Development and Characterization of a Prosthetic Intervertebral Disc, Hudgins, Georgia Inst. of Tech., Nov. 1998).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Second Amended Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 26 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Baumgartner USP 5,370,697 in view of Stubstad USP 3,867,728).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Second Amended Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 27 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Coppes USP 7,563,284 in view of Stubstad USP 3,867,728).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Second Amended Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 28 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Baumgartner USP 5,370,697 in view of Stubstad USP 3,867,728 in further view of Development and Characterization of a Prosthetic Intervertebral Disc, Hudgins, Georgia Inst. of Tech., Nov. 1998).Applicant
- Spinal Kinetics, Inc.'s Second Amended Preliminary Invalidity Contentions—Exhibit 29 (chart comparing claims of USP 7,429,270 to Coppes USP 7,563,284 in view of Stubstad USP 3,867,728 further in view of Development and Characterization of a Prosthetic Intervertebral Disc, Hudgins, Georgia Inst. of Tech., Nov. 1998).Applicant
- Burri et al., Neuentwicklung eines Implantates für den totalen Bandschiebenersatz, Vorgelegt von: Im Rahmen des Studiums für “Maschinenbau und Vergahrenstechnik” an der Eidgenöossischen Technischen Hochschule Zürich, im Feb. 2002).Applicant
- English Translation of Burri et al., Neuentwicklung eines Implantates für den totalen Bandschiebenersatz, Vorgelegt von: Im Rahmen des Studiums für “Maschinenbau und Vergahrenstechnik” an der Eidgenöossischen Technischen Hochschule Zürich, im Feb. 2002), entitled Mechanical Engineering and Process Engineering at the Swiss Fedearl Institute of Technology Zurich (ETH Zurich) Feb. 2002.Applicant
- Burri et al., Neuentwicklung eines lumbalen bewegungserhaltenden Bandscheibenimplantates, Feb. 25, 2002.Applicant
- English Translation of Burri et al., Neuentwicklung eines lumbalen bewegungserhaltenden Bandscheibenimplantates, Feb. 25, 2002.Applicant
- Hudgins, Development and Characterization of a Prosthetic Intervertebral Disc, Hudgins, Georgia Inst. of Tech., Nov. 1998.Applicant
- Kweon et al., Optimal Design of Synthetic Intervertebral Disc Prosthesis Considering Nonlinear Mechanical Behavior, Dec. 20, 2001.Applicant