Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology
Published in: European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology 2/2013

Open Access 01-02-2013 | Original Article

The LP-ESP® lumbar disc prosthesis with 6 degrees of freedom: development and 7 years of clinical experience

Authors: Jean-Yves Lazennec, Alain Aaron, Adrien Brusson, Jean-Patrick Rakover, Marc-Antoine Rousseau

Published in: European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology | Issue 2/2013

Login to get access

Abstract

The viscoelastic lumbar disk prosthesis-elastic spine pad (LP-ESP®) is an innovative one-piece deformable but cohesive interbody spacer providing 6 full degrees of freedom about the 3 axes, including shock absorption. A 20-year research program has demonstrated that this concept provides mechanical properties very close to those of a natural disk. Improvements in technology have made it possible to solve the problem of the bond between the elastic component and the titanium endplates and to obtain an excellent biostability. The prosthesis geometry allows limited rotation and translation with resistance to motion (elastic return property) aimed at avoiding overload of the posterior facets. The rotation center can vary freely during motion. It thus differs substantially from current prostheses, which are 2- or 3-piece devices involving 1 or 2 bearing surfaces and providing 3 or 5 degrees of freedom. This design and the adhesion-molding technology differentiate the LP-ESP prosthesis from other mono-elastomeric prostheses, for which the constraints of shearing during rotations or movement are absorbed at the endplate interface. Seven years after the first implantation, we can document in a solid and detailed fashion the course of clinical outcomes and the radiological postural and kinematic behavior of this prosthesis.
Literature
1.
Fritzell P, Hagg O, Wessberg P, Nordwall A (2001) 2001 Volvo Award Winner in clinical studies: lumbar fusion versus nonsurgical treatment for chronic low back pain: a multicenter randomized controlled trial from the Swedish Lumbar Spine Study Group. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 26:2521–2532 (discussion 2532–4)CrossRef
2.
Resnick DK, Malone DG, Ryken TC (2002) Guidelines for the use of discography for the diagnosis of painful degenerative lumbar disc disease. Neurosurg Focus 13:E12PubMedCrossRef
3.
Wetzel FT, LaRocca SH, Lowery GL, Aprill CN (1994) The treatment of lumbar spinal pain syndromes diagnosed by discography. Lumbar arthrodesis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 19:792–800CrossRef
4.
Moore KR, Pinto MR, Butler LM (2002) Degenerative disc disease treated with combined anterior and posterior arthrodesis and posterior instrumentation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 27:1680–1686CrossRef
5.
Kumar MN, Baklanov A, Chopin D (2001) Correlation between sagittal plane changes and adjacent segment degeneration following lumbar spine fusion. Eur Spine J 10:314–319PubMedCrossRef
6.
Rao RD, David KS, Wang M (2005) Biomechanical changes at adjacent segments following anterior lumbar interbody fusion using tapered cages. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 30:2772–2776CrossRef
7.
Rahm MD, Hall BB (1996) Adjacent-segment degeneration after lumbar fusion with instrumentation: a retrospective study. J Spinal Disord 9:392–400PubMedCrossRef
8.
Fernstrom U (1966) Arthroplasty with intercorporal endoprosthesis in herniated disc and in painful disc. Acta Chir Scand Suppl 357:154–159PubMed
9.
Cunningham BW, Dmitriev AE, Hu N, McAfee PC (2003) General principles of total disc replacement arthroplasty: seventeen cases in a nonhuman primate model. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 28:S118–S124CrossRef
10.
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):S115–S123PubMed
11.
Frelinghuysen P, Huang RC, Girardi FP, Cammisa FP Jr (2005) Lumbar total disc replacement part I: rationale, biomechanics, and implant types. Orthop Clin North Am 36:293–299PubMedCrossRef
12.
Auerbach JD, Wills BP, McIntosh TC, Balderston RA (2007) Evaluation of spinal kinematics following lumbar total disc replacement and circumferential fusion using in vivo fluoroscopy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 32:527–536CrossRef
13.
Awe OO, Maltenfort MG, Prasad S, Harrop JS, Ratliff JK (2011) Impact of total disc arthroplasty on the surgical management of lumbar degenerative disc disease: analysis of the Nationwide Inpatient Sample from 2000 to 2008. Surg Neurol Int 2:139PubMedCrossRef
14.
Blumenthal S, McAfee PC, Guyer RD, Hochschuler SH, Geisler FH, Holt RT, Garcia R Jr, Regan JJ, Ohnmeiss DD (2005) A 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 outcomes. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 30:1565–1575 (discussion E387–91)CrossRef
15.
Szpalski M, Gunzburg R, Mayer M (2002) Spine arthroplasty: a historical review. Eur Spine J 11(Suppl 2):S65–S84PubMed
16.
Goel VK, Grauer JN, Patel T, Biyani A, Sairyo K, Vishnubhotla S, Matyas A, Cowgill I, Shaw M, Long R, Dick D, Panjabi MM, Serhan H (2005) Effects of charite artificial disc on the implanted and adjacent spinal segments mechanics using a hybrid testing protocol. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 30:2755–2764CrossRef
17.
Hochschuler SH, Ohnmeiss DD, Guyer RD, Blumenthal SL (2002) Artificial disc: preliminary results of a prospective study in the United States. Eur Spine J 11(Suppl 2):S106–S110PubMed
18.
Galbusera F, Bellini CM, Zweig T, Ferguson S, Raimondi MT, Lamartina C, Brayda-Bruno M, Fornari M (2008) Design concepts in lumbar total disc arthroplasty. Eur Spine J 17:1635–1650PubMedCrossRef
19.
Errico T, Sasso R, Miz G, Theofilos C, Brodke D (2008) Total disc replacement for treating lumbar discogenic back pain: a Prospective Randomized Multicenter Study of FlexiCore® vs. Spinal Fusion Spine J 360:15S–16SCrossRef
20.
Fraser RD, Ross ER, Lowery GL, Freeman BJ, Dolan M (2004) AcroFlex design and results. Spine J 4:245S–251SPubMedCrossRef
21.
Enker P, Steffee A, McMillin C, Keppler L, Biscup R, Miller S (1993) Artificial disc replacement. Preliminary report with a 3-year minimum follow-up. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 18:1061–1070CrossRef
22.
Panjabi MM, Oxland TR, Yamamoto I, Crisco JJ (1994) Mechanical behavior of the human lumbar and lumbosacral spine as shown by three-dimensional load-displacement curves. J Bone Joint Surg Am 76:413–424PubMed
23.
Yamamoto I, Panjabi MM, Crisco T, Oxland T (1989) Three-dimensional movements of the whole lumbar spine and lumbosacral joint. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 14:1256–1260CrossRef
24.
Campana S, Charpail E, de Guise JA, Rillardon L, Skalli W, Mitton D (2011) Relationships between viscoelastic properties of lumbar intervertebral disc and degeneration grade assessed by MRI. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 4:593–599PubMedCrossRef
25.
Gardner-Morse MG, Stokes IA (2004) Structural behavior of human lumbar spinal motion segments. J Biomech 37:205–212PubMedCrossRef
26.
Virgin WJ (1951) Experimental investigations into the physical properties of the intervertebral disc. J Bone Joint Surg Br 33-B:607–611PubMed
27.
Kemper AR, McNally C, Duma SM (2007) The influence of strain rate on the compressive stiffness properties of human lumbar intervertebral discs. Biomed Sci Instrum 43:176–181PubMed
28.
Bouzakis KD, Mitsi S, Michailidis N, Mirisidis I, Mesomeris G, Maliaris G, Korlos A, Kapetanos G, Antonarakos P, Anagnostidis K (2004) Loading simulation of lumbar spine vertebrae during a compression test using the finite elements method and trabecular bone strength properties, determined by means of nanoindentations. J Musculoskelet Neuronal Interact 4:152–158PubMed
29.
Christenson EM, Dadsetan M, Wiggins M, Anderson JM, Hiltner A (2004) Poly(carbonate urethane) and poly(ether urethane) biodegradation: in vivo studies. J Biomed Mater Res A 69:407–416PubMedCrossRef
30.
Kurtz SM, Siskey R, Reitman M (2010) Accelerated aging, natural aging, and small punch testing of gamma-air sterilized polycarbonate urethane acetabular components. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 93:442–447PubMed
31.
FDA, Food and Drug Administration (2000) Guidance document for the preparation of IDEs for spinal systems
32.
Hagg O, Fritzell P, Nordwall A (2003) The clinical importance of changes in outcome scores after treatment for chronic low back pain. Eur Spine J 12(1):12–20PubMed
33.
34.
Price DD, Bush FM, Long S, Harkins SW (1994) A comparison of pain measurement characteristics of mechanical visual analogue and simple numerical rating scales. Pain 56:217–226PubMedCrossRef
35.
Girard J, Touraine D, Soenen M, Massin P, Laffargue P, Migaud H (2005) Measurement of head penetration on digitalized radiographs: reproducibility and accuracy. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot 91:137–142PubMedCrossRef
36.
Tournier C, Aunoble S, Le Huec JC, Lemaire JP, Tropiano P, Lafage V, Skalli W (2007) Total disc arthroplasty: consequences for sagittal balance and lumbar spine movement. Eur Spine J 16:411–421PubMedCrossRef
37.
Huang RC, Girardi FP, Cammisa FP Jr, Lim MR, Tropiano P, Marnay T (2005) Correlation between range of motion and outcome after lumbar total disc replacement: 8.6-year follow-up. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 30:1407–1411CrossRef
38.
Huang RC, Girardi FP, Cammisa FP Jr, Tropiano P, Marnay T (2003) Long-term flexion-extension range of motion of the prodisc total disc replacement. J Spinal Disord Tech 16:435–440PubMedCrossRef
39.
Lim MR, Loder RT, Huang RC, Lyman S, Zhang K, Sama A, Papadopoulos EC, Warner K, Girardi FP, Cammisa FP Jr (2006) Measurement error of lumbar total disc replacement range of motion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 31:E291–E297CrossRef
40.
Wong KWN, Leong JCY, Chan MK, Luk KDK, Lu WW (2004) The flexion-extension profile of lumbar spine in 100 healthy volunteers. Spine 29:1636–1641PubMedCrossRef
41.
Wong KW, Luk KD, Leong JC, Wong SF, Wong KK (2006) Continuous dynamic spinal motion analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 31:414–419CrossRef
42.
Lee SW, Wong KW, Chan MK, Yeung HM, Chiu JL, Leong JC (2002) Development and validation of a new technique for assessing lumbar spine motion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 27:E215–E220CrossRef
43.
Tropiano P, Huang RC, Girardi FP, Marnay T (2003) Lumbar disc replacement: preliminary results with ProDisc II after a minimum follow-up period of 1 year. J Spinal Disord Tech 16:362–368PubMedCrossRef
44.
McAfee PC, Cunningham B, Holsapple G, Adams K, Blumenthal S, Guyer RD, Dmietriev A, Maxwell JH, Regan JJ, Isaza J (2005) A prospective, randomized, multicenter Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption study of lumbar total disc replacement with the CHARITE artificial disc versus lumbar fusion: part II: evaluation of radiographic outcomes and correlation of surgical technique accuracy with clinical outcomes. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 30:1576–1583 (discussion E388–90)CrossRef
45.
Gioia G, Mandelli D, Randelli F (2007) The Charité III artificial disc lumbar disc prosthesis: assessment of medium-term results. J Orthop Traumatol 8:134–139CrossRef
46.
Bertagnoli R, Yue JJ, Shah RV, Nanieva R, Pfeiffer F, Fenk-Mayer A, Kershaw T, Husted DS (2005) The treatment of disabling single-level lumbar discogenic low back pain with total disc arthroplasty utilizing the Prodisc prosthesis: a prospective study with 2-year minimum follow-up. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 30:2230–2236CrossRef
47.
Guyer RD, McAfee PC, Banco RJ, Bitan FD, Cappuccino A, Geisler FH, Hochschuler SH, Holt RT, Jenis LG, Majd ME, Regan JJ, Tromanhauser SG, Wong DC, Blumenthal SL (2009) Prospective, randomized, multicenter Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption study of lumbar total disc replacement with the CHARITE artificial disc versus lumbar fusion: five-year follow-up. Spine J 9:374–386PubMedCrossRef
48.
David T (1993) Lumbar disc prosthesis. Surgical technique, indications and clinical results in 22 patients with a minimum of 12 months follow-up. Eur Spine J 1:254–259PubMedCrossRef
49.
Siepe CJ, Wiechert K, Khattab MF, Korge A, Mayer HM (2007) Total lumbar disc replacement in athletes: clinical results, return to sport and athletic performance. Eur Spine J 16:1001–1013PubMedCrossRef
50.
Zigler JE (2012) Five-year results of the ProDisc-L multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled trial comparing ProDisc-L with circumferential spinal fusion for single-level disabling degenerative disk disease. Semin Spine Surg 24:25–31CrossRef
51.
Delamarter R, Zigler JE, Balderston RA, Cammisa FP, Goldstein JA, Spivak JM (2011) Prospective, 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 months. J Bone Joint Surg Am 93:705–715PubMedCrossRef
52.
Chung SS, Lee CS, Kang CS, Kim SH (2006) The effect of lumbar total disc replacement on the spinopelvic alignment and range of motion of the lumbar spine. J Spinal Disord Tech 19:307–311PubMedCrossRef
53.
Le Huec J, Basso Y, Mathews H, Mehbod A, Aunoble S, Friesem T, Zdeblick T (2005) The effect of single-level, total disc arthroplasty on sagittal balance parameters: a prospective study. Eur Spine J 14:480–486PubMedCrossRef
54.
Huang RC, Tropiano P, Marnay T, Girardi FP, Lim MR, Cammisa FP Jr (2006) Range of motion and adjacent level degeneration after lumbar total disc replacement. Spine J 6:242–247PubMedCrossRef
55.
Nechtow W, Hintner M, Bushelow M, Kaddick C (2006) Intervertebral disc replacement mechanical performance depends strongly on input parameters. 52nd Orthopaedic Research Society, Chicago, Abstract 0118
56.
Grupp TM, Yue JJ, Garcia R Jr, Basson J, Schwiesau J, Fritz B, Blömer W (2009) Biotribological evaluation of artificial disc arthroplasty devices: influence of loading and kinematic patterns during in vitro wear simulation. Eur Spine J 18(1):98–108
57.
Ingham E, Fisher J (2000) Biological reactions to wear debris in total joint replacement. Proc Instn Mech Engrs 214:21–37
58.
Ensink FB, Saur PM, Frese K, Seeger D, Hildebrandt J (1996) Lumbar range of motion: influence of time of day and individual factors on measurements. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 21:1339–1343CrossRef
Metadata
Title
The LP-ESP® lumbar disc prosthesis with 6 degrees of freedom: development and 7 years of clinical experience
Authors
Jean-Yves Lazennec
Alain Aaron
Adrien Brusson
Jean-Patrick Rakover
Marc-Antoine Rousseau
Publication date
01-02-2013
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology / Issue 2/2013
Print ISSN: 1633-8065
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1068
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-012-1166-x

Other articles of this Issue 2/2013

European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology 2/2013 Go to the issue

Original Article

Short-term functional outcome after hip resurfacing surgery

Original Article

Fracture of the acetabulum: a retrospective review of ninety-one patients treated at a single institution

Original Article

Lumbo-sacral malformations and spina bifida occulta in medieval skeletons from Brittany

Book Analyzes

Lumenta CB, Di Rocco C, Haase J, Mooij JJA (eds): Neurosurgery (European manual of medicine)

General Review

Viscosupplementation with hyaluronic acid in the treatment for cartilage lesions: a review of current evidence and future directions

Original Article

Stem cells derived from osteoarthritic knee mesenchymal tissues: a pilot study