Article Figures & Data
Figures
- Figure 1
Second generation ProDisc-L total disc replacement device is based on a ball-and-socket concept. The design consists of a superior endplate with a central keel, a high modulus polyethylene inlay, and an inferior endplate with central keel.
- Figure 2
Postoperative follow-up examination at 6 weeks. Standing, lateral radiographs in extension (left) and flexion (right).
- Figure 3
Three-dimensional model overlay with flexion and extension x-ray images. Change in angle measured from resulting 3D model.
- Figure 4
Three-dimensional finite element model aligned to its loaded neutral configuration, includes vertebral bodies, implant in neutral position, lateral annulus, and major elements (left). The rigid body reference node of the superior vertebra (black circle) is located at the center of rotation of the superior vertebra and superior endplate of the implant (right).
- Figure 5
Range of motion evaluation from the templating procedure is typically limited by facet impingement in flexion (above) and implant impingement in extension (below).
- Figure 6
Comparison of actual, predicted, and optimal range of motion (ROM) in flexion (right) and extension (left) for patient cohort. Increased risk of adjacent segment disease can occur if postoperative ROM of at least 5° is not achieved, indicated here by the region within the dotted lines.
- Figure 7
Facet geometry influences range of motion (ROM) in flexion. The smaller overall size of the vertebrae in combination with more coronally orientated and vertical facet joints in segment 13 is responsible for the small ROM achieved (left). On the contrary, the larger vertebrae, more sagittally orientated and rounded or flatter facet joints in the patient who received segment 14 resulted in a significantly higher ROM and was associated with better clinical outcome (right).
Tables
In this issue
Jump to section
Related Articles
Cited By...
- No citing articles found.