|Publication number||US20060282165 A1|
|Application number||US 11/440,552|
|Publication date||Dec 14, 2006|
|Filing date||May 25, 2006|
|Priority date||Mar 19, 2004|
|Also published as||US8480742, US20070043441, WO2007016673A2, WO2007016673A3|
|Publication number||11440552, 440552, US 2006/0282165 A1, US 2006/282165 A1, US 20060282165 A1, US 20060282165A1, US 2006282165 A1, US 2006282165A1, US-A1-20060282165, US-A1-2006282165, US2006/0282165A1, US2006/282165A1, US20060282165 A1, US20060282165A1, US2006282165 A1, US2006282165A1|
|Original Assignee||Perumala Corporation|
|Export Citation||BiBTeX, EndNote, RefMan|
|Patent Citations (49), Referenced by (17), Classifications (35), Legal Events (1)|
|External Links: USPTO, USPTO Assignment, Espacenet|
This application in a continuation-in-part of co-pending applications Ser. No. 11/246,961, filed Oct. 7, 2005, entitled TOTAL ARTIFICIAL INTERVERTEBRAL DISC, Ser. No. 11/195,890, filed Aug. 2, 2005, entitled TOTAL ARTIFICIAL DISC, International Application No. PCT/US2005/009323, filed Mar. 19, 2005, entitled ROTATING, LOCKING, SPRING-LOADED ARTIFICIAL DISK, and Ser. No. 10/804,895, filed Mar. 19, 2004, entitled ROTATING, LOCKING, SPRING-LOADED ARTIFICIAL DISK.
The present invention relates to an intervertebral disc implant for stabilizing two adjacent vertebrae that maintains the functions of the normal, healthy disc. More specifically, the present invention relates to a rectangularly-shaped disc implant that is expanded in the middle portion that is used as an alternative to spinal fusion.
Treatment of the damaged intervertebral disc, especially in the cervical and/or lumbar region of the spine, continues to be a challenging field of medicine. The classic treatment for a ruptured disc is diskectomy, i.e., removal of the disc from between the vertebrae. In this process, all or a portion of the intervertebral disc is removed, leaving a defect that may bother the patient throughout the rest of their life and compromising the normal interaction between disc and adjacent vertebrae. A procedure that is sometimes used as an alternative to diskectomy is to remove some or all of the disc and then fill the disc space with a bone graft, usually bone chips cut from the patient's iliac crest, or bone plug, bringing about fusion of the vertebrae above and below the disc, eliminating the empty space between the vertebrae.
Diskectomy with fusion is not ideal because the replaced bone does not have the function of the cartilaginous tissue of the disc, i.e. no cushioning effect, and has complications because of several factors. First, conventional bone plugs used to pack the disc space do not conform to the space of the disc because the disc bulges maximally in the center while the bone plug is generally cylindrically shaped and the disc space is wider in the middle and narrower at its anterior and posterior ends. For this reason, many commercially available bone plugs have just four points at which they contact the bodies of the adjacent vertebrae, i.e. two points at each of the front and back of the disc space. Second, access to the disc is from the side of the dorsal spine of the adjacent vertebrae, leaving a space that is “off-center” relative to the bodies of the adjacent vertebrae such that the stability of the implant is even more problematical than might be apparent from the limited contact resulting from the shape of the intervertebral space. Another complication is the possibility of infection or other conditions that may require removal of the implant. Also, if the bone pieces do not fuse, they may eventually extrude out of the disc space, pressuring the nerve roots. The most significant disadvantages of fusion, however, is that it eliminates all motion at the joint between the two vertebrae as well as the shock-absorbing/cushioning function of the disc.
Various prosthetic disc plugs, or implants, are disclosed in the art, but all are characterized by limitations of not conforming to the shape of the disc space, lack of stability when inserted off-center, inability to be removed, or other disadvantages. For instance, U.S. Pat. No. 4,863,476 (and its European counterpart, EP-A-0260044) describes an elongate, generally cylindrically-shaped body divided longitudinally into two portions having a cam device between the two portions for increasing the space between the two body portions once inserted into the disc space. However, because that device is cylindrical in shape such that the only contact points between the device and the vertebral bodies are at the front and back of the disc space, creating increased likelihood of instability, that device is generally unsuitable for use after partial diskectomy.
The art also discloses intervertebral disc prostheses such as are shown in U.S. Pat. Nos. 3,867,728, 4,309,777, 4,863,477, 4,932,969, Applicant's own Pat. No. 5,123,926, and French Patent Application No. 8816184 that may have more general contact with the adjacent discs, and spinal joint prostheses as described in U.S. Pat. No. 4,759,769, but which are not intended for use in fusion of the discs. The utility of such devices is also limited by a number of disadvantages, in particular, the same lack of cushioning described above in connection with prior art disc plugs and implants. Further, those implants and prostheses that attempt to address this cushioning problem have generally failed because they are not capable of supporting the load imposed upon them by the active post-surgical patient. Further, many prior implants and prostheses require removal of the disc. Removing the disc is not totally undesirable because removing the intervertebral disc does help prevent problems from recurrent disc herniation through the opening into the intervertebral disc space. However, as with all surgical procedures, it is desirable to utilize as much existing structure as possible and to minimize invasiveness. One reason it is desirable to retain as much of the original disc as possible is that if an implant subsequently fails, or if further surgical intervention is indicated for reasons such as infection, the only alternative that is generally available after removal of the intervertebral disc is fusion.
There is, therefore, a need for a device capable of stabilizing the vertebrae adjacent an intervertebral disc that overcomes the various disadvantages and limitations of known spinal fusion procedures and the disc plugs and implants that are used in such procedures, and it is an object of the present invention to provide apparatus and methods for meeting that need.
There is also a need for a device that can be implanted into the disc space in a procedure that decreases the likelihood of recurrent disc herniation and it is also an object of the present invention to provide apparatus and methods for meeting that need.
There is also a need for a device that mimics the function of the disc, in part by retaining as much of the undamaged disc as possible, that cooperates with the remaining portion of the disc to function in a manner similar to the normal, intact disc to provide the cushioning effect of the disc, and it is an object of the present invention to provide apparatus and methods for meeting that need.
There is also a need for a device that not only functions to provide the cushioning effect of the intervertebral disc but that also provides the opportunity for repairing the remaining portion of the disc, and it is an object of the present invention to provide apparatus and methods for meeting that need.
Another need that is apparent from the limitations and disadvantages of prior procedures, disc plugs, and prostheses is the need for a device that maintains the function of the healthy, intact intervertebral disc when implanted between adjacent vertebrae, is capable of being implanted in a surgical procedure that is minimally invasive, and that does not require removal of the entire intervertebral disc, and it is therefore also an object of the present invention to provide apparatus and methods for meeting that need.
Another need that is apparent from the limitations and disadvantages of prior procedures, disc plugs, and prostheses is the need for a device that works with the structure of the intervertebral disc space to maintain as much of the normal function of the disc as possible, and it is also an object of the present invention to provide apparatus and methods that combine the properties of cushioning (by utilizing the remaining portion of the disc), stability (by utilizing a monolithic, biconvex implant), shock absorption (by providing different cushioning characteristics in different portions of the disc space), and provide the opportunity to help reconstruct and/or prevent recurrent herniation of the remaining portion of the disc (by utilizing a hydrogel to fill gaps in the disc space and using known surgical repair techniques) thereby meeting that need.
Another need that is apparent is the need for a device that is capable of supporting the load imposed upon it when implanted in the disc space while also providing the cushioning function of the natural intervertebral disc and it is also an object of the present invention to provide apparatus and methods for meeting that need.
Another need that is apparent is a need for a frame for an intervertebral disc implant comprised of two spaced apart, substantially parallel arms, a bridge connecting the arms at one end, a “U”-shaped ear extending at approximately a right angle from the end of one of the arms opposite the bridge and having a hole formed therein for receiving a screw, and a “Y”-shaped ear extending at approximately a right angle from the end of one of the arms opposite the bridge having holes formed in both forks of the Y-shaped ear for receiving screws, the frame being comprised of a material that tends to return to its original shape after the frame is subjected to either a compression or tension load object of the present invention is to provide a frame for meeting that need.
Other objects, and the many advantages of the present invention, will be made clear to those skilled in the art in the following detailed description of several preferred embodiments of the present invention and the drawings appended hereto. Those skilled in the art will recognize, however, that the embodiments of the invention described herein are only examples provided for the purpose of describing the making and using of the present invention and that they are not the only embodiments of artificial discs that are constructed in accordance with the teachings of the present invention.
The present invention addresses the above-described problem by providing an intervertebral disc implant comprising an elongate body comprised of a resilient material having a cavity extending longitudinally into the body, the height of the body being greater than the width of the body, and a frame received within the cavity in the body comprised of two spaced apart, substantially parallel arms and a bridge connecting the arms at one end, the frame being comprised of a material that tends to return to its original shape after the frame is subjected to either a compression or tension load, the frame extending only part way into the cavity of the body in which it is received.
In another aspect, the present invention provides a method of mimicking the function of the intervertebral disc of the intact spinal column after removal of a portion or all of the intervertebral disc from between the two adjacent vertebrae comprising the steps of inserting a resilient body having a height greater than its width and a cavity formed therein with a key received in the cavity into the intervertebral disc space with the height of the body oriented substantially parallel to the longitudinal axis of the spinal column, removing the key from the cavity in the body after the body is inserted into the intervertebral disc space, and inserting a frame part way into the cavity in the body, the frame comprising first and second arms arms connected by a bridge at one end for providing resistance to flexion and/or extension of the spinal column, and filling the portion of the cavity in the body into which the frame does not extend with a hydrogel.
Referring now to the figures,
In more detail,
Not only are the top and bottom surfaces 36 of body 12 convex in the anterior-posterior and side-to-side directions, but they are also provided with an integral metal strip 20 that may be textured or provided with a grooved surface to facilitate the ingrowth of bone onto the surfaces 36. In the preferred embodiment shown, the metal strips 20 are provided with structure for resisting anterior-posterior movement of body 12 once inserted into the disc space in the form of prongs 22 for biting into the cortical bone on the bearing surface of the adjacent vertebrae (not shown). In a second embodiment, the metal strips 20 affixed to the surfaces 36 of body 12 are covered with a porous or roughened titanium coating and perhaps even a layer of calcium phosphate for this purpose; other suitable coatings/surfaces are known in the art and include titanium wire mesh, plasma-sprayed titanium, porous cobalt-chromium and bioactive materials such as hydroxyapatite and the aforementioned calcium phosphate. This component of the artificial disc 10 of the present invention functions in a manner similar to the function of the cartilage of the normal, healthy disc to facilitate ingrowth of bone on the surfaces 36.
The implant body 12 is provided with an elongate cavity 18 for receiving a key 14 therein. In the preferred embodiment shown, the cavity 18 is formed with a portion near the opening into body 12 that is rectangularly-shaped (when viewed in cross-section) with dimensions that approximate the rectangular shape of key 14 and an enlarged portion deeper into body 12, both for a purpose described below. Because the body 12 is comprised of a resilient material that can be compressed, the key 14 is comprised of a relatively incompressible material such as stainless steel, titanium, or a polymer such as nylon or polycarbonate (or any other relatively imcompressible biocompatible material) to maintain the shape of the body 12 when inserted into the intervertebral disc space after removal of a portion of the intervertebral disc. Although not limited to this use, the intervertebral implant 10 of the present invention is optimally placed in the space from which a portion of the intervertebral disc has been removed at the centerline of the spinal column.
Frame 16 is shown in
As best shown in
In the preferred embodiment, frame 16 is comprised of a material that tends to return to its original shape after the frame is subjected to either a compression or tension load. Materials that are characterized by this spring-like function when formed into the frame 16 include, but are not limited to stainless steel, titanium and titanium alloys, cobalt-chrome (Co—Cr) alloys, cobalt-chromium-molybdenum (Co—Cr—Mo), and medical grade (inert) polymeric plastics such as polyethylene, all as known in the art. In other words, when the implant body 12 is inserted into the intervertebral disc space and key 14 is removed and replaced by frame 16, body 12 is subjected to both compression and tension loads as the spine flexes and extends and as the patient moves during his/her normal daily routine. When subjected to these compression and tension loads, frame 16 deforms. Under compression, the ends 25 of the arms 24 opposite bridge 26 tend to move closer to each other and when in tension, the ends 25 of the arms 24 opposite bridge 26 tend to move further apart; in other words, the arms 24 of frame 16 deviate from their original spaced apart position (in the preferred embodiment shown, the two arms are substantially parallel, but those skilled in the art who have the benefit of this disclosure will recognize that the invention is not limited to a frame having parallel arms) when under compression or tension force. When the respective compression or tension force is relieved, the frame 16 tends to return to its original shape, i.e., the ends 25 of arms 24 opposite bridge 26 return to their original spaced relationship, and the arms therefore assume their original, spaced apart relationship. When subjected to loads in this manner, frame 16 acts as both a “backbone” and as a spring to help both bear compression loads and relieve tension loads in a manner that mimics normal disc function.
Note also that when the implant body 12 is inserted into the intervertebral disc space, the bridge 26 of frame 16 is positioned posteriorally relative to the ends 25 of arms 24 opposite bridge 26. The spring function of frame 16 is advantageous because, as the patient bends forward, the ends of arms 24 opposite bridge 26 are subjected to compression loads, and the further the patient bends, the more the material comprising frame 16 tends to resist the compression load, providing the spring function discussed above. As best shown in
As noted above, implant body 12 is provided with a cavity 18 and after positioning the implant body 12 in the space from which a portion of the intervertebral disc has been removed and removing the key 14 from cavity 18, the frame 16 is inserted into the cavity in place of the key. As is best shown in
The positioning of frame 16 only part way into the cavity 18 in body 12 serves an additional purpose. The spring function of frame 16 provides resistance to compression and tension loads, but it also functions to allow anterior-posterior translation of the axis of rotation as the spine flexes so as to mimic the kinematics of the healthy disc. First, because of the resilient nature of the material comprising body 12, the portion of the material comprising body 12 that is positioned between the arms 24 of frame 16 and the bearing surfaces of the vertebral bodies of the adjacent vertebrae provides additional cushioning and resistance to the deformation of the frame 16 under extraordinary compression load. Second, because it extends only part way into the cavity 18 of body 12, the body 12 having the frame 16 positioned therein provides different amounts of resistance to compression load as the patient bends. The resistance to compression provided by the location of frame 16 part way into cavity 18 is greater as spinal flexion increases compared to the resistance to compression provided by the portion of implant body 12 in which the resistance to compression is provided by the material comprising body 12 and the hydrogel located in the portion of cavity 18 into which frame 16 does not extend. Of course the surgeon has the opportunity to fine-tune the amount of resistance as the spine flexes and/or extends by utilizing a frame with arms 24 of greater or shorter length so as to provide less or more resistance to flexure, respectively, and by adding or removing hydrogel in the portion of the cavity 18 into which frame 16 does not extend.
The healthy intervertebral disc includes three parts, the nucleus pulposus, annulus fibrosus, and cartilagenous endplate, each with separate functions, and all of which cooperate to provide motion, load bearing characteristics, and the other functions of the intact spinal column. The intervertebral disc implant 10 of the present invention provides corresponding parts, with their corresponding contribution to function, in the form of the implant body 12, which functions in a manner similar to the annulus fibrosus to maintain disc height, the frame-filled and hydrogel-filled cavity 18 which functions in a manner similar to the nucleus pulposus to distribute load and resist compression and tension, and the roughened surface of the metal strips 20 on surfaces 36, which functions in a manner similar to the cartilagenous endplate by providing a surface that facilitates ingrowth of the bone, thereby making the intervertebral implant of the present invention an integral part of the spinal column. As noted above, the surfaces of the metal strips 20 may be provided with prongs 22 or other structure for engaging the adjacent vertebrae to resist anterior-posterior movement of the implant 10 in the intervertebral disc space, but ingrowth of bone, facilitated by the roughened surface and/or surface coating on strips 20, is particularly advantageous in retaining the implant 10 in the disc space.
Those skilled in the art who have the benefit of this disclosure will recognize that certain changes can be made to the component parts of the apparatus of the present invention without changing the manner in which those parts function and/or interact to achieve their intended result. By way of example, those skilled in the art who have the benefit of this disclosure will recognize that the amount of resistance to compression and/or tension load provided by the frame 16 depends on such factors as the length of the arms 24 and the material comprising the frame 16 and that although it may be appropriate to implant an artificial disc constructed in accordance with the teachings of the present invention having a frame with a certain level of resistance to compression/tension load, it may be that an intervertebral disc including a frame with a different level of resistance to compression/tension load is better suited for implantation in another patient. It will also be recognized by those skilled in the art that to obtain desirable load resistance properties, it may be advantageous to increase the thickness of the central projection 34 so as to limit movement of the arms 24 toward each other under compression load or to make the implant body 12 from a combination of materials, with an embedded layer of material that is relatively incompressible or having a second set of resilience and/or load-bearing characteristics, or as a laminated “sandwich” of polyurethane and other material(s), each material adding a unique component to the load bearing characteristics of the implant body 12. All such changes, and others that will be clear to those skilled in the art from this description of the preferred embodiments of the invention, are intended to fall within the scope of the following, non-limiting claims.
|Cited Patent||Filing date||Publication date||Applicant||Title|
|US4309777 *||Nov 13, 1980||Jan 12, 1982||Patil Arun A||Artificial intervertebral disc|
|US4401112 *||Oct 2, 1981||Aug 30, 1983||Rezaian Seyed M||Spinal fixator|
|US4553273 *||Nov 23, 1983||Nov 19, 1985||Henry Ford Hospital||Vertebral body prosthesis and spine stabilizing method|
|US4657550 *||Jan 16, 1986||Apr 14, 1987||Daher Youssef H||Buttressing device usable in a vertebral prosthesis|
|US4759769 *||Jun 22, 1987||Jul 26, 1988||Health & Research Services Inc.||Artificial spinal disc|
|US4863476 *||Aug 28, 1987||Sep 5, 1989||Shepperd John A N||Spinal implant|
|US4865608 *||Nov 20, 1987||Sep 12, 1989||Brooker Jr Andrew F||Grooved endoprosthesis|
|US4932975 *||Oct 16, 1989||Jun 12, 1990||Vanderbilt University||Vertebral prosthesis|
|US5002576 *||Jun 6, 1989||Mar 26, 1991||Mecron Medizinische Produkte Gmbh||Intervertebral disk endoprosthesis|
|US5059193 *||Apr 19, 1990||Oct 22, 1991||Spine-Tech, Inc.||Expandable spinal implant and surgical method|
|US5123926 *||Feb 22, 1991||Jun 23, 1992||Madhavan Pisharodi||Artificial spinal prosthesis|
|US5171278 *||Feb 22, 1991||Dec 15, 1992||Madhavan Pisharodi||Middle expandable intervertebral disk implants|
|US5236460 *||Oct 10, 1991||Aug 17, 1993||Midas Rex Pneumatic Tools, Inc.||Vertebral body prosthesis|
|US5290312 *||Sep 3, 1991||Mar 1, 1994||Alphatec||Artificial vertebral body|
|US5390683 *||Feb 21, 1992||Feb 21, 1995||Pisharodi; Madhavan||Spinal implantation methods utilizing a middle expandable implant|
|US5443514 *||Oct 1, 1993||Aug 22, 1995||Acromed Corporation||Method for using spinal implants|
|US5458641 *||Sep 8, 1993||Oct 17, 1995||Ramirez Jimenez; Juan J.||Vertebral body prosthesis|
|US5522899 *||Jun 7, 1995||Jun 4, 1996||Sofamor Danek Properties, Inc.||Artificial spinal fusion implants|
|US5653762 *||Jun 7, 1995||Aug 5, 1997||Pisharodi; Madhavan||Method of stabilizing adjacent vertebrae with rotating, lockable, middle-expanded intervertebral disk stabilizer|
|US5658335 *||Mar 9, 1995||Aug 19, 1997||Cohort Medical Products Group, Inc.||Spinal fixator|
|US5658336 *||Jun 7, 1995||Aug 19, 1997||Pisharodi; Madhavan||Rotating, locking, middle-expanded intervertebral disk stabilizer|
|US5669909 *||Mar 30, 1995||Sep 23, 1997||Danek Medical, Inc.||Interbody fusion device and method for restoration of normal spinal anatomy|
|US5755796 *||Jun 6, 1996||May 26, 1998||Ibo; Ivo||Prosthesis of the cervical intervertebralis disk|
|US5800550 *||Sep 11, 1997||Sep 1, 1998||Sertich; Mario M.||Interbody fusion cage|
|US5827328 *||Nov 22, 1996||Oct 27, 1998||Buttermann; Glenn R.||Intervertebral prosthetic device|
|US5865846 *||May 15, 1997||Feb 2, 1999||Bryan; Vincent||Human spinal disc prosthesis|
|US5888223 *||Jun 9, 1998||Mar 30, 1999||Bray, Jr.; Robert S.||Anterior stabilization device|
|US5893890 *||Jul 25, 1997||Apr 13, 1999||Perumala Corporation||Rotating, locking intervertebral disk stabilizer and applicator|
|US5980522 *||Nov 21, 1997||Nov 9, 1999||Koros; Tibor||Expandable spinal implants|
|US5989291 *||Feb 26, 1998||Nov 23, 1999||Third Millennium Engineering, Llc||Intervertebral spacer device|
|US6019793 *||Oct 21, 1996||Feb 1, 2000||Synthes||Surgical prosthetic device|
|US6093205 *||Jun 25, 1998||Jul 25, 2000||Bridport-Gundry Plc C/O Pearsalls Implants||Surgical implant|
|US6102950 *||Jan 19, 1999||Aug 15, 2000||Vaccaro; Alex||Intervertebral body fusion device|
|US6176882 *||Feb 19, 1999||Jan 23, 2001||Biedermann Motech Gmbh||Intervertebral implant|
|US6264655 *||Aug 1, 1997||Jul 24, 2001||Madhavan Pisharodi||Cervical disk and spinal stabilizer|
|US6264695 *||Sep 30, 1999||Jul 24, 2001||Replication Medical, Inc.||Spinal nucleus implant|
|US6309421 *||Apr 13, 1999||Oct 30, 2001||Madhavan Pisharodi||Rotating, locking intervertebral disk stabilizer and applicator|
|US6419704 *||Oct 8, 1999||Jul 16, 2002||Bret Ferree||Artificial intervertebral disc replacement methods and apparatus|
|US6419705 *||Jun 23, 1999||Jul 16, 2002||Sulzer Spine-Tech Inc.||Expandable fusion device and method|
|US6419724 *||Jun 5, 2000||Jul 16, 2002||Sidmar N.V.||Method for reducing iron oxides and for melting iron and installations therefor|
|US6428576 *||Apr 14, 2000||Aug 6, 2002||Endospine, Ltd.||System for repairing inter-vertebral discs|
|US6454806 *||Jul 26, 1999||Sep 24, 2002||Advanced Prosthetic Technologies, Inc.||Spinal surgical prosthesis|
|US6478822 *||May 24, 2001||Nov 12, 2002||Spineco, Inc.||Spherical spinal implant|
|US6669731 *||Nov 9, 2001||Dec 30, 2003||Spinecore, Inc.||Intervertebral spacer device having a slotted domed arch strip spring|
|US6682563 *||Mar 4, 2002||Jan 27, 2004||Michael S. Scharf||Spinal fixation device|
|US6863689 *||Apr 23, 2002||Mar 8, 2005||Spinecore, Inc.||Intervertebral spacer having a flexible wire mesh vertebral body contact element|
|US6887273 *||Nov 9, 2001||May 3, 2005||Spinecore, Inc.||Intervertebral spacer device having a domed arch shaped spring|
|US6936070 *||Jan 15, 2002||Aug 30, 2005||Nabil L. Muhanna||Intervertebral disc prosthesis and methods of implantation|
|US7320708 *||Nov 13, 2002||Jan 22, 2008||Sdgi Holdings, Inc.||Cervical interbody device|
|Citing Patent||Filing date||Publication date||Applicant||Title|
|US7658940||Mar 30, 2007||Feb 9, 2010||Skeletal Kinetics, Llc||Calcium phosphate cements comprising autologous bone|
|US7682540||May 8, 2008||Mar 23, 2010||Georgia Tech Research Corporation||Method of making hydrogel implants|
|US7910124||Feb 7, 2005||Mar 22, 2011||Georgia Tech Research Corporation||Load bearing biocompatible device|
|US8002830||Feb 7, 2005||Aug 23, 2011||Georgia Tech Research Corporation||Surface directed cellular attachment|
|US8142808||May 8, 2008||Mar 27, 2012||Georgia Tech Research Corporation||Method of treating joints with hydrogel implants|
|US8318192||Nov 18, 2008||Nov 27, 2012||Georgia Tech Research Corporation||Method of making load bearing hydrogel implants|
|US8486436||Mar 22, 2012||Jul 16, 2013||Georgia Tech Research Corporation||Articular joint implant|
|US8603176 *||Oct 21, 2010||Dec 10, 2013||Kinetic Spine Technologies Inc.||Artificial intervertebral spacer|
|US8740983||Nov 12, 2010||Jun 3, 2014||Nuvasive, Inc.||Spinal fusion implants and related methods|
|US8840668||Nov 12, 2010||Sep 23, 2014||Nuvasive, Inc.||Spinal implants, instruments and related methods|
|US8895073||Mar 21, 2011||Nov 25, 2014||Georgia Tech Research Corporation||Hydrogel implant with superficial pores|
|US20050278025 *||Jun 10, 2004||Dec 15, 2005||Salumedica Llc||Meniscus prosthesis|
|US20110093075 *||Apr 21, 2011||Kinetic Spine Technologies Inc.||Artificial intervertebral spacer|
|US20130197643 *||Jan 31, 2012||Aug 1, 2013||Blackstone Medical, Inc.||Intervertebral disc prosthesis and method|
|US20150119992 *||Jan 9, 2015||Apr 30, 2015||X-Spine Systems, Inc.||Spinal implant co-insertion system and method|
|EP2419145A2 *||Apr 16, 2010||Feb 22, 2012||Warsaw Orthopedic, Inc.||Vertebral endplate connection implant and method|
|WO2008121990A1 *||Mar 31, 2008||Oct 9, 2008||Skeletal Kinetics Llc||Calcium phosphate cements comprising autologous bone|
|Cooperative Classification||A61F2002/30426, A61F2210/0061, A61F2002/3067, A61F2002/30795, A61F2310/00407, A61F2002/30571, A61F2002/4495, A61F2002/30566, A61F2220/0025, A61F2310/00023, A61F2002/30546, A61F2002/30601, A61F2002/30563, A61F2002/30331, A61F2310/00029, A61F2002/30069, A61F2002/30578, A61F2250/0002, A61F2/442, A61F2002/482, A61F2/3094, A61F2310/00796, A61F2002/30581, A61F2310/00011, A61F2002/30841, A61F2/441, A61F2002/30075, A61F2250/0012, A61F2002/30579, A61F2220/0033, A61F2310/00161, A61F2002/449|
|Aug 18, 2006||AS||Assignment|
Owner name: PERUMALA CORPORATION, TEXAS
Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:PISHARODI, MADHAVAN;REEL/FRAME:018192/0338
Effective date: 20060608