It is common practice to remove a spinal disc in cases of spinal disc deterioration, disease or spinal injury. The discs sometimes become diseased or damaged such that the intervertebral separation is reduced. Such events cause the height of the disc nucleus to decrease, which in turn causes the annulus to buckle in areas where the laminated plies are loosely bonded. As the overlapping laminated plies of the annulus begin to buckle and separate, either circumferential or radial annular tears may occur. Such disruption to the natural intervertebral separation produces pain, which can be alleviated by removal of the disc and maintenance of the natural separation distance. In cases of chronic back pain resulting from a degenerated or herniated disc, removal of the disc becomes medically necessary.
In some cases, the damaged disc may be replaced with a disc prosthesis intended to duplicate the function of the natural spinal disc. In other cases it is desired to fuse the adjacent vertebrae together after removal of the disc, sometimes referred to as “intervertebral fusion” or “interbody fusion.”
In cases of intervertebral fusion, it is known to position a spacer centrally within the space where the spinal disc once resided, or to position multiple spacers within that space. Such practices are characterized by certain disadvantages, including a disruption in the natural curvature of the spine. For example, the vertebrae in the lower “lumbar” region of the spine reside in an arch referred to in the medical field as having a sagittal alignment. The sagittal alignment is compromised when adjacent vertebral bodies that were once angled toward each other on their posterior side become fused in a different, less angled orientation relative to one another.
While the occurrence of successful spinal surgeries of any of the variety mentioned above has greatly improved in recent years, there continue to be challenges and room for improvement in the area of intervertebral spacers and prosthetics. In particular, a patient's precise anatomy is often not known prior to surgery although general predictions will be available. Additionally, while surgery is a well-planned process, not all conditions can be known beforehand and some variations will likely not be ideal. Accordingly, during surgery a surgeon will likely need to make decisions that balance speed, safety, and efficacy. One such decision can relate to the approach angle at which the spacer is inserted into the patient's body. This angle can vary either anteriorally or posteriorally from a lateral approach depending on the surgical conditions encountered. A spacer that is adaptable to the wide vagaries of surgical conditions that might be encountered will provide many benefits to patients and surgeons. Presently, many intervertebral spacers require an insertion tool that fixedly threads into the spacer's body thereby limiting the alignment between the tool and the spacer to a single position. Thus, there remains a need for intervertebral spacers that offer the surgeon more ease-of-use and flexibility than the spacers that are currently available.
U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2008/0009880 and U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2008/0221694 A1 disclose a spinal spacer system that includes a proximal end, a distal end, and a rotatably couplable engagement member disposed on the proximal end. The inserter extends around a transverse feature and the spacer is able to rotate freely relative to the inserter. However, pivoting is performed on the engagement member, requiring accurate angular orientation and manipulation of the engagement member by a surgeon during the placement of a spacer.
There remains a need for intervertebral spacers that offer the surgeon more ease-of-use and flexibility than the spacers that are currently available.
USPTO Backgrounds
USPTO Backgrounds