A review on the current state of ball-on-socket type artificial lumbar disc prosthesis_Journal of Biomedical Engineering

Authors：

XIANG Dingding ^1,2 , ZHU Jia ³ , WANG Song ³ , LIAO Zhenhua ³ ,  LIU Weiqiang ^1,2,3

1. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, P.R.China;
2. State Key Laboratory of Tribology, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, P.R.China;
3. Biomechanics and Biotechnology Lab, Research Institute of Tsinghua University in Shenzhen, Shenzhen, Guangdong 518057, P.R.China;

Corresponding author：

Keywords：

artificial lumbar disc; ball-on-socket; prosthesis; current state

DOI：

10.7507/1001-5515.201909044

Video：

Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Total lumbar disc replacement is an alternative to interbody fusion for the effective treatment of symptomatic degenerative disc disease. This paper reviewed the history of ball-on-socket type artificial lumbar disc (ALD) prosthesis, which is a typical ALD prosthesis and summarized the ALD prosthesis research progress, according to different materials such as metal-on-metal, metal-on-polymer, and polymer-on-polymer prosthesis. The structural design factors of ball-on-socket type ALD prosthesis were analyzed and its prospect of development was also presented. The purpose of this paper is to provide a theoretical reference for the design of the ball-on-socket ALD prosthesis by reviewing the current state of ball-on-socket type ALD prosthesis.

Citation： XIANG Dingding, ZHU Jia, WANG Song, LIAO Zhenhua, LIU Weiqiang. A review on the current state of ball-on-socket type artificial lumbar disc prosthesis. Journal of Biomedical Engineering, 2020, 37(3): 527-532, 540. doi: 10.7507/1001-5515.201909044 Copy

1.	Vos T, Barber R M, Bell B, et al. Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 301 acute and chronic diseases and injuries in 188 countries, 1990–2013: a systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2013. Lancet, 2015, 386(9995): 743-800.
2.	Blackwell D L, Lucas J W, Clarke T C. Summary health statistics for U.S. adults: National Health Interview Survey, 2012. Vital Health Stat, 2014, 260(260):1-171.
3.	Song Jian, Liao Zhenhua, Shi Hongyu, et al. Fretting wear study of PEEK-based composites for bio-implant application. Tribol Lett, 2017, 65(4): Article number 150.
4.	Formica M, Divano S, Cavagnaro L, et al. Lumbar total disc arthroplasty: outdated surgery or here to stay procedure? A systematic review of current literature. J Orthopaed Traumatol, 2017, 18(3): 197-215.
5.	Salzmann S N, Plais N, Shue J, et al. Lumbar disc replacement surgery—successes and obstacles to widespread adoption. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med, 2017, 10(2): 153-159.
6.	Radcliff K, Spivak J, Darden B N, et al. Five-year reoperation rates of 2-level lumbar total disk replacement versus fusion: results of a prospective, randomized clinical trial. Clinical Spine Surg, 2018, 31(1): 37-42.
7.	张振军, 李阳, 廖振华, 等. 有限元法在腰椎生物力学应用中的研究进展和展望. 生物医学工程学杂志, 2016, 33(6): 1196-1202.
8.	Yue J J, Garcia R, Blumenthal S, et al. Five-year results of a randomized controlled trial for lumbar artificial discs in single-level degenerative disc disease. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2019: 1.
9.	Bono C M, Garfin S R. History and evolution of disc replacement. Spine J, 2004, 4(6 Suppl): S145-S150.
10.	Abi-Hanna D, Kerferd J, Phan K, et al. Lumbar disk arthroplasty for degenerative disk disease: literature review. World Neurosurg, 2018, 109: 188-196.
11.	Reeks J, Liang H. Materials and their failure mechanisms in total disc replacement. Lubricants, 2015, 3(2): 346-364.
12.	Veruva S Y, Steinbeck M J, Toth J, et al. Which design and biomaterial factors affect clinical wear performance of total disc replacements? A systematic review. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 2014, 472(12): 3759-3769.
13.	Lu S, Hai Y, Kong C, et al. An 11-year minimum follow-up of the Charite III lumbar disc replacement for the treatment of symptomatic degenerative disc disease. Eur Spine J, 2015, 24(9): 2056-2064.
14.	van Ooij A, Oner F C, Verbout A J. Complications of artificial disc replacement: A report of 27 patients with the SB Charité disc. J Spinal Disord Tech, 2003, 16(4): 369-383.
15.	Punt I M, Visser V M, van Rhijn L W, et al. Complications and reoperations of the SB Charite lumbar disc prosthesis: experience in 75 patients. Eur Spine J, 2008, 17(1): 36-43.
16.	Choi J I, Kim S H, Lim D J, et al. Biomechanical changes in disc pressure and facet strain after lumbar spinal arthroplasty with CHARITE^TM in the human cadaveric spine under physiologic compressive follower preload. Turk Neurosurg, 2017, 27(2): 252-258.
17.	Siepe C J, Heider F, Wiechert K, et al. Mid- to long-term results of total lumbar disc replacement: a prospective analysis with 5- to 10-year follow-up. Spine J, 2014, 14(8): 1417-1431.
18.	Yue J J, Garcia R J, Miller L E. The activL^® Artificial Disc: a next-generation motion-preserving implant for chronic lumbar discogenic pain. Med Dev (Auckl), 2016, 9: 75-84.
19.	Girardi F, Shein D, Shue J. Evaluation of aesculap implant systems activ-L artificial disc for the treatment of degenerative disc disease. Expert Rev Med Dev, 2016, 13(12): 1069-1072.
20.	Mathews H H, LeHuec J, Friesem T, et al. Design rationale and biomechanics of Maverick total disc arthroplasty with early clinical results. Spine J, 2004, 4(6): S268-S275.
21.	Assaker R, Ritter-Lang K, Vardon D, et al. Maverick total disc replacement in a real-world patient population: A prospective, multicentre, observational study. Eur Spine J, 2015, 24(9): 2047-2055.
22.	Bastien J, Lecomte Y, Willems S. A retrospective review of 345 patients with lumbar tdr in two years follow-up over 10 years of practice in one belgian clinical center: Results. Acta Orthopaedica Belgica, 2016, 82(3): 440-455.
23.	Pettine K, Ryu R, Techy F. Why lumbar artificial disk replacements (LADRS) fail. Clin Spine Surg, 2017, 30(6): E743-E747.
24.	Guyer R D, Pettine K, Roh J S, et al. Five-year follow-up of a prospective, randomized trial comparing two lumbar total disc replacements. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2016, 41(1): 3-8.
25.	Malham G M, Parker R M. Early experience with lateral lumbar total disc replacement: Utility, complications and revision strategies. J Clin Neurosci, 2017, 39: 176-183.
26.	Yue J J, Garcia R. Five-year results of a randomized controlled trial for lumbar artificial discs in single-level degenerative disc disease. Spine J, 2017, 17(10): S70.
27.	Pokorny G, Marchi L, Amaral R, et al. Lumbar total disc replacement by the lateral approach-up to 10 years follow-up. World Neurosurg, 2019, 122: e325-e333.
28.	Grupp T M, Yue J J, Jr R G, et al. Evaluation of impingement behaviour in lumbar spinal disc arthroplasty. Eur Spine J, 2015, 24(9): 2033-2046.
29.	Eckold D G, Dearn K D, Shepherd D E T. The evolution of polymer wear debris from total disc arthroplasty. Biotribology, 2015, 1-2: 42-50.
30.	Hyde P J, Fisher J, Hall R M. Wear characteristics of an unconstrained lumbar total disc replacement under a range of in vitro test conditions. J Biomed Mater Res Part B Appl Biomater, 2017, 105(1): 46-52.
31.	Wenzel S A, Shepherd D E. Contact stresses in lumbar total disc arthroplasty. Biomed Mater Eng, 2007, 17(3): 169-173.
32.	Moghadas P, Mahomed A, Hukins D W L, et al. Friction in metal-on-metal total disc arthroplasty: Effect of ball radius. J Biomech, 2012, 45(3): 504-509.
33.	Hart R A, DePasse J M, Daniels A H. Failure to launch: what the rejection of lumbar total disk replacement tells us about American spine surgery. Clin Spine Surg, 2017, 30(6): E759-E764.
34.	Mróz A, Skalski K, Walczyk W. New lumbar disc endoprosthesis applied to the patient's anatomic features. Acta Bioeng Biomech, 2015, 17(2): 25-34.
35.	Mróz A, Wiśniewski T, Skalski K. Effect of selective laser melting technology on the tribological properties of the prototype of intervertebral disc endoprothesis. Inżynieria Powierzchni, 2016, 2: 24-30.
36.	Mróz A B, Lapaj L, Wisniewski T, et al. Friction and wear of the intervertebral disc endoprosthesis manufactured with use of selective laser melting process. Rapid Prototyping J, 2017, 23(6): 1032-1042.

1. Vos T, Barber R M, Bell B, et al. Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 301 acute and chronic diseases and injuries in 188 countries, 1990–2013: a systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2013. Lancet, 2015, 386(9995): 743-800.
2. Blackwell D L, Lucas J W, Clarke T C. Summary health statistics for U.S. adults: National Health Interview Survey, 2012. Vital Health Stat, 2014, 260(260):1-171.
3. Song Jian, Liao Zhenhua, Shi Hongyu, et al. Fretting wear study of PEEK-based composites for bio-implant application. Tribol Lett, 2017, 65(4): Article number 150.
4. Formica M, Divano S, Cavagnaro L, et al. Lumbar total disc arthroplasty: outdated surgery or here to stay procedure? A systematic review of current literature. J Orthopaed Traumatol, 2017, 18(3): 197-215.
5. Salzmann S N, Plais N, Shue J, et al. Lumbar disc replacement surgery—successes and obstacles to widespread adoption. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med, 2017, 10(2): 153-159.
6. Radcliff K, Spivak J, Darden B N, et al. Five-year reoperation rates of 2-level lumbar total disk replacement versus fusion: results of a prospective, randomized clinical trial. Clinical Spine Surg, 2018, 31(1): 37-42.
7. 张振军, 李阳, 廖振华, 等. 有限元法在腰椎生物力学应用中的研究进展和展望. 生物医学工程学杂志, 2016, 33(6): 1196-1202.
8. Yue J J, Garcia R, Blumenthal S, et al. Five-year results of a randomized controlled trial for lumbar artificial discs in single-level degenerative disc disease. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2019: 1.
9. Bono C M, Garfin S R. History and evolution of disc replacement. Spine J, 2004, 4(6 Suppl): S145-S150.
10. Abi-Hanna D, Kerferd J, Phan K, et al. Lumbar disk arthroplasty for degenerative disk disease: literature review. World Neurosurg, 2018, 109: 188-196.
11. Reeks J, Liang H. Materials and their failure mechanisms in total disc replacement. Lubricants, 2015, 3(2): 346-364.
12. Veruva S Y, Steinbeck M J, Toth J, et al. Which design and biomaterial factors affect clinical wear performance of total disc replacements? A systematic review. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 2014, 472(12): 3759-3769.
13. Lu S, Hai Y, Kong C, et al. An 11-year minimum follow-up of the Charite III lumbar disc replacement for the treatment of symptomatic degenerative disc disease. Eur Spine J, 2015, 24(9): 2056-2064.
14. van Ooij A, Oner F C, Verbout A J. Complications of artificial disc replacement: A report of 27 patients with the SB Charité disc. J Spinal Disord Tech, 2003, 16(4): 369-383.
15. Punt I M, Visser V M, van Rhijn L W, et al. Complications and reoperations of the SB Charite lumbar disc prosthesis: experience in 75 patients. Eur Spine J, 2008, 17(1): 36-43.
16. Choi J I, Kim S H, Lim D J, et al. Biomechanical changes in disc pressure and facet strain after lumbar spinal arthroplasty with CHARITE^TM in the human cadaveric spine under physiologic compressive follower preload. Turk Neurosurg, 2017, 27(2): 252-258.
17. Siepe C J, Heider F, Wiechert K, et al. Mid- to long-term results of total lumbar disc replacement: a prospective analysis with 5- to 10-year follow-up. Spine J, 2014, 14(8): 1417-1431.
18. Yue J J, Garcia R J, Miller L E. The activL^® Artificial Disc: a next-generation motion-preserving implant for chronic lumbar discogenic pain. Med Dev (Auckl), 2016, 9: 75-84.
19. Girardi F, Shein D, Shue J. Evaluation of aesculap implant systems activ-L artificial disc for the treatment of degenerative disc disease. Expert Rev Med Dev, 2016, 13(12): 1069-1072.
20. Mathews H H, LeHuec J, Friesem T, et al. Design rationale and biomechanics of Maverick total disc arthroplasty with early clinical results. Spine J, 2004, 4(6): S268-S275.
21. Assaker R, Ritter-Lang K, Vardon D, et al. Maverick total disc replacement in a real-world patient population: A prospective, multicentre, observational study. Eur Spine J, 2015, 24(9): 2047-2055.
22. Bastien J, Lecomte Y, Willems S. A retrospective review of 345 patients with lumbar tdr in two years follow-up over 10 years of practice in one belgian clinical center: Results. Acta Orthopaedica Belgica, 2016, 82(3): 440-455.
23. Pettine K, Ryu R, Techy F. Why lumbar artificial disk replacements (LADRS) fail. Clin Spine Surg, 2017, 30(6): E743-E747.
24. Guyer R D, Pettine K, Roh J S, et al. Five-year follow-up of a prospective, randomized trial comparing two lumbar total disc replacements. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2016, 41(1): 3-8.
25. Malham G M, Parker R M. Early experience with lateral lumbar total disc replacement: Utility, complications and revision strategies. J Clin Neurosci, 2017, 39: 176-183.
26. Yue J J, Garcia R. Five-year results of a randomized controlled trial for lumbar artificial discs in single-level degenerative disc disease. Spine J, 2017, 17(10): S70.
27. Pokorny G, Marchi L, Amaral R, et al. Lumbar total disc replacement by the lateral approach-up to 10 years follow-up. World Neurosurg, 2019, 122: e325-e333.
28. Grupp T M, Yue J J, Jr R G, et al. Evaluation of impingement behaviour in lumbar spinal disc arthroplasty. Eur Spine J, 2015, 24(9): 2033-2046.
29. Eckold D G, Dearn K D, Shepherd D E T. The evolution of polymer wear debris from total disc arthroplasty. Biotribology, 2015, 1-2: 42-50.
30. Hyde P J, Fisher J, Hall R M. Wear characteristics of an unconstrained lumbar total disc replacement under a range of in vitro test conditions. J Biomed Mater Res Part B Appl Biomater, 2017, 105(1): 46-52.
31. Wenzel S A, Shepherd D E. Contact stresses in lumbar total disc arthroplasty. Biomed Mater Eng, 2007, 17(3): 169-173.
32. Moghadas P, Mahomed A, Hukins D W L, et al. Friction in metal-on-metal total disc arthroplasty: Effect of ball radius. J Biomech, 2012, 45(3): 504-509.
33. Hart R A, DePasse J M, Daniels A H. Failure to launch: what the rejection of lumbar total disk replacement tells us about American spine surgery. Clin Spine Surg, 2017, 30(6): E759-E764.
34. Mróz A, Skalski K, Walczyk W. New lumbar disc endoprosthesis applied to the patient's anatomic features. Acta Bioeng Biomech, 2015, 17(2): 25-34.
35. Mróz A, Wiśniewski T, Skalski K. Effect of selective laser melting technology on the tribological properties of the prototype of intervertebral disc endoprothesis. Inżynieria Powierzchni, 2016, 2: 24-30.
36. Mróz A B, Lapaj L, Wisniewski T, et al. Friction and wear of the intervertebral disc endoprosthesis manufactured with use of selective laser melting process. Rapid Prototyping J, 2017, 23(6): 1032-1042.

Journal of Biomedical Engineering

A review on the current state of ball-on-socket type artificial lumbar disc prosthesis

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Previous Article

Next Article

Format

Content