Dynamic Spinal Stabilization System for Motion Preservation

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current spinal stabilization technologies fail to effectively mimic the natural motion of healthy vertebral segments, leading to limited range of motion and increased stress on adjacent segments, and are inadequate for treating facet joint disorders and other spinal indications.

Innovation Solution

A dynamic stabilization system comprising superior and inferior components with adjustable strut members and joints that allow for compressible and distractable movement, enabling spinal motion similar to a healthy segment without removing any spinal structure, and can be used in conjunction with prosthetic intervertebral discs.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If spine fusion is performed to eliminate spinal pain, then pain relief is achieved, but range of motion is limited and stress on adjacent segments increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvepain reliefVSAvoidrange of motion
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The dynamic stabilization system employs movable components including a polyaxial pedicle screw with adjustable rod connection, a rod with articulating joints, and a compression member that can dynamically adjust. This dynamic structure provides pain relief through stabilization while preserving physiological range of motion, directly resolving the contradiction between reliability and ease of operation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system allows parameter changes in the stabilization mechanism, specifically the ability to adjust compression forces, rod positioning, and joint articulation. These parameter adjustments enable the device to provide adequate stabilization for pain relief while maintaining flexibility for natural spinal motion, addressing both pain relief and range of motion requirements.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Stability of the object's composition

If spine fusion is performed to stabilize the spine, then spinal stability is improved, but adjacent motion segments experience accelerated degeneration

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvespinal stabilityVSAvoidadjacent segment durability
Core Design Contradiction:
Stability of the object's compositionVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The dynamic stabilization system maintains spinal stability through controlled articulation and compression mechanisms that adapt to physiological motion. By providing dynamic rather than rigid stabilization, the system preserves motion in adjacent segments, preventing the accelerated degeneration that occurs with fusion, thus improving both spinal stability and adjacent segment durability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The rod with articulating joints acts as an intermediary element that transmits and distributes mechanical loads along the spinal column. This intermediary structure allows for physiological motion while maintaining overall stability, reducing stress concentration on adjacent segments and preventing accelerated degeneration.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

3Ease of operation

If artificial intervertebral discs are used to restore motion, then range of motion is improved, but facet joint disorders are not adequately addressed

Engineering Contradiction:
Improverange of motionVSAvoidfacet joint treatment efficacy
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The dynamic stabilization system serves multiple functions: it provides spinal stabilization, preserves range of motion through articulating joints, and specifically addresses facet joint disorders through the polyaxial pedicle screw and compression member configuration. This multi-functionality allows the single system to address both motion restoration and facet joint treatment, resolving the contradiction between range of motion and treatment efficacy.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

4Stability of the object's composition

If rigid stabilization devices are used to prevent translation, then spinal stability is improved, but natural motion is restricted

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetranslation controlVSAvoidnatural motion
Core Design Contradiction:
Stability of the object's compositionVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The system replaces rigid stabilization with dynamic components including articulating joints in the rod and adjustable polyaxial connections. These dynamic elements control undesirable translations through controlled articulation while preserving natural physiological motion, directly resolving the contradiction between translation control and natural motion.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The compression member and ligament-like structures provide flexible stabilization that controls translation through soft tissue-like compliance. This flexible approach maintains spinal stability while allowing natural motion, contrasting with rigid devices that restrict physiological movement.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #30Flexible shells and thin films

Data Source

PatentUS7998175B2Systems and methods for posterior dynamic stabilization of the spine
Publication Date: 2011.08.16 THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIV
  • US7998175B2 patent drawing
  • US7998175B2 patent drawing
  • US7998175B2 patent drawing

AI summary

Systems and devices for dynamically stabilizing the spine are provided. The systems include a superior component for attachment to a superior vertebra of a spinal motion segment and an inferior component for attachment to an inferior vertebral of a spinal motion segment. The interconnection between the two components enables the spinal motion segment to move in a manner that mimics the natural motion of the spinal motion segment. Methods are also provided for stabilizing the spine and for implanting the subject systems.