ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2015
In vivo compatibility of Dynesys(®) spinal implants: a case series of five retrieved periprosthetic tissue samples and corresponding implants.
Article in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- How to improve the mechanical safety of a novel spinal implant while saving costs and time.JOR spine · 2024Review
- Retrieval analysis of PEEK rods pedicle screw system: three cases analysis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2024Article
- Bionate Biocompatibility: In Vivo Study in Rabbits.ACS omega · 2022Article
- Efficacy of the Dynesys Hybrid Surgery for Patients with Multi-Segmental Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo determine whether particulate debris is present in periprosthetic tissue from revised Dynesys(®) devices, and if present, elicits a biological tissue reaction.
methodsFive Dynesys(®) dynamic stabilization systems consisting of pedicle screws (Ti alloy), polycarbonate-urethane (PCU) spacers and a polyethylene-terephthalate (PET) cord were explanted for pain and screw loosening after a mean of 2.86 years (1.9-5.3 years). Optical microscopy and scanning electron microscopy were used to evaluate wear, deformation and surface damage, and attenuated total reflectance Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy to assess surface chemical composition of the spacers. Periprosthetic tissue morphology and wear debris were determined using light microscopy, and PCU and PET wear debris by polarized light microscopy.
resultsAll implants had surface damage on the PCU spacers consistent with scratches and plastic deformation; 3 of 5 exhibited abrasive wear zones. In addition to fraying of the outer fibers of the PET cords in five implants, one case also evidenced cord fracture. The pedicle screws were unremarkable. Patient periprosthetic tissues around the three implants with visible PCU damage contained wear debris and a corresponding macrophage infiltration. For the patient revised for cord fracture, the tissues also contained large wear particles (>10 μm) and giant cells. Tissues from the other two patients showed comparable morphologies consisting of dense fibrous tissue with no inflammation or wear debris.
conclusionsThis is the first study to evaluate wear accumulation and local tissue responses for explanted Dynesys(®) devices. Polymer wear debris and an associated foreign-body macrophage response were observed in three of five cases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.