Spinal Stabilization Device with Staggered Motion Limiting Members

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current spinal fusion techniques result in permanent immobilization of motion segments, leading to loss of mobility, stress concentration, and accelerated degeneration in adjacent joints, and often fail to alleviate patient pain, as they eliminate the natural function of the motion segment unit and reduce support.

Innovation Solution

A soft spine stabilization system that allows up to six degrees of freedom, featuring staggered motion limiting members on trapezoid-shaped endplates and a body with adjustable height, designed to replicate the physiologic response of a healthy spinal motion segment, enabling flexion, extension, rotation, and lateral bending while minimizing wear and preventing extreme compression.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Stability of the object's composition

If fusion is performed to stabilize the motion segment unit, then stability is improved, but mobility is lost and stress concentration occurs in adjacent joints

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovestabilityVSAvoidmobility
Core Design Contradiction:
Stability of the object's compositionVSStrength

Solution Approach 1:

The device employs a dynamic stabilization mechanism where the body can compress and expand within the endplates, allowing the motion segment to adapt to loading conditions. The motion limiting members are designed to permit controlled movement while preventing excessive motion, creating a dynamic system that maintains stability without completely eliminating mobility.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The device changes the mechanical parameters of the motion segment by allowing controlled compression and expansion of the body within the endplates. This parameter change enables the system to provide stability through load distribution while maintaining physiological motion capabilities, rather than achieving stability through rigid fusion.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Stability of the object's composition

If rigid stabilization is implemented, then immobilization is achieved, but the natural function of the motion segment unit is eliminated

Engineering Contradiction:
ImproveimmobilizationVSAvoidnatural function
Core Design Contradiction:
Stability of the object's compositionVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The device uses flexible endplates and a compressible body that can deform within the endplate boundaries. This flexible construction allows the motion limiting members to constrain motion while still permitting the natural compressive and expansive movements of the spinal motion segment, thereby preserving natural function rather than eliminating it.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #30Flexible shells and thin films

Solution Approach 2:

The system transitions from static rigid immobilization to dynamic controlled movement. The body can dynamically compress and expand within the endplates during normal spinal motion, and the motion limiting members dynamically adjust to permit or restrict motion based on loading conditions, maintaining natural function while providing stabilization.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

3Stability of the object's composition

If fusion is performed, then stabilization is achieved, but pain relief is not guaranteed and clinical success is limited

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovestabilizationVSAvoidpain relief
Core Design Contradiction:
Stability of the object's compositionVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The device is designed to be self-adjusting through the natural compression and expansion of the body within the endplates during spinal motion. This self-service mechanism allows the system to automatically adapt to loading conditions and maintain physiological motion patterns, potentially improving pain relief reliability by preserving natural movement rather than imposing rigid stabilization.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

4Stability of the object's composition

If motion limiting members are added to constrain motion, then stability is improved, but device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemotion controlVSAvoidstructure
Core Design Contradiction:
Stability of the object's compositionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The device segments the motion control function into discrete motion limiting members positioned at specific locations within the endplates. Each member independently contributes to motion control, allowing for simplified design and assembly while achieving the desired stability. The segmentation enables clear differentiation between motion-permitted and motion-restricted zones.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The motion limiting members are merged with the endplate structure, forming an integrated assembly where the limiting members are positioned within or attached to the endplates. This merging reduces the number of separate components and simplifies the overall device structure while maintaining effective motion control capability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #5Merging (Combining)

Data Source

PatentUS9539101B2Device for stabilizing a vertebral joint and method for anterior insertion thereof
Publication Date: 2017.01.10 GLOBUS MEDICAL INC
  • US9539101B2 patent drawing
  • US9539101B2 patent drawing
  • US9539101B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A prosthetic device can be used as a prosthesis following a discectomy or a corpectomy. The prosthetic device includes two endplates with staggered motion limiting members. The device can be configured to allow six degrees of motion when comparing one endplate relative to the other. The endplates can be configured to fix the joint by changing the body held within the device and by adding a locking plate and fasteners. A method teaches how to insert a device to an intervertebral space via an anterior incision.