Spinal stabilization device

Abstract

A connection unit for use in a spinal stabilization device, in one embodiment, includes a longitudinal member having first and second ends, and a flexible section disposed between the first and second ends, the flexible section having at least one groove formed therein, wherein the flexible section is characterized by a cross-sectional profile that is different from that of the first and second ends.

Description

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS [0001] The present application is a continuation-in-part of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10 / 798,014, filed Mar. 10, 2004, entitled “A Method and Apparatus for Flexible Fixation of a Spine” which is a continuation-in-part of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10 / 728,566, filed on Dec. 5, 2003.BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION [0002] 1. Field of the Invention [0003] The present invention relates to a method and system for stabilizing a spinal column and, more particularly, to a method and system of spinal fixation in which one or more screw type securing members are implanted and fixed into a portion of a patient's spinal column and a longitudinal member including flexible, semi-rigid rod-like or plate-like structures of various cross-sections (hereinafter referred to as “rods” or “plates”, respectively) are connected and fixed to the upper ends of the securing members to provide stabilization of the spinal column. [0004] 2. Description of the Relat...

AI Technical Summary

Benefits of technology

[0020] To overcome the deficiencies of conventional spinal fixation devices, in one embodiment, the inventor of the present invention has invented a novel flexible spinal fixation device with an improved construction and design that is durable and provides a desired level of flexibility and stability.

[0021] As a result of long-term studies to reduce the operation time required for minimally invasive...

Problems solved by technology

However, following the surgical procedure, fusion takes additional time to achieve maximum stability and a spinal fixation device is typically used to support the spinal column until a desired level of fusion is achieved.

However, because the connection units prevent normal movement of the spinal column, after prolonged use, the spinal fixation device can cause ill effects, such as “junctional syndrome” (transitional syndrome) or “fusion disease” resulting in further complications and abnormalities associated with the spinal column.

In particular, due to the high rigidity of the rods or plates used in conventional fixation devices, the patient's fixed joints are not allowed to move after the surgical operation, and the movement of the spinal joints located above or under the operated area is increased.

Consequently, such spinal fixation devices cause decreased mobility of the patient and increased stress and instability to the spinal column joints adjacent to the operated area.

It has been reported that excessive rigid spinal fixation is not helpful to the fusion process due to load shielding caused by rigid fixation.

However, because these devices are intended for use following a bone fusion procedure, they are not well-suited for spinal fixation without fusion.

Thus, in the end result, these devices do not prevent the problem of rigid fixation resulting from fusion.

Thus, it is effective in selected cases but is not appropriate for cases that require greater stability and fixation.

However, it has not yet been determined whether the Dynesys device can maintain long-term stability with flexibility and durability in a controlled study.

Because it has polyethylene components and interfaces, there is a risk of mechanical failure.

Furthermore, due to the mechanical configuration of the device, the surgical technique required to attach the device to the spinal column is complex and complicated.

These devices are flexible but they are not well-suited for enduring long-term axial loading and stress.

The design of existing flexible fixation devices are not well suited to provide varying levels of flexibility to provide optimum results for each individual candidate.

However, this patent is primarily concerned with providing a spinal fixation device that permits “relative longitudinal translational sliding movement along [the] vertical axis” of the spine and neither teaches nor suggests any particular designs of connection units (e.g., rods or plates) that can provide various flexibility characteristics.

Because they are typically very thin to provide suitable flexibility, such prior art rods are prone to mechanical failure and have been known to break after implantation in patients.

Therefore, conventional spinal fixation devices have not provided a comprehensive and balanced solution to the problems associated with curing spinal diseases.

Many of the prior devices are characterized by excessive rigidity, which leads to the problems discussed above while others, though providing some flexibility, are not well-adapted to provide varying degrees of flexibility.

Thus, in conventional spinal fixation procedures, the patient's back is incised about 10˜15 cm, and as a result, the back muscle, which is important for maintaining the spinal column, is incised or injured, resulting in significant post-operative pain to the patient and a s...

Images