If instability or abnormal movement is the root cause of back pain, then, spinal fusion would always be successful in relieving back pain. So where does that bring us? It has become quite evident with the rash of recent articles that Dynamic Stabilization is the "New, New Thing!"
It seems that Stem Cells and Dynamic Stabilization are first and foremost on the agenda of our industry. Yet, many surgeons are the first to admit that when it comes to consensus, everyone agrees to disagree on biomechanics when it comes to Dynamic Stabilization.
So the Spine Blogger needed to pose the following questions;
- How much control of motion is desirable?
- How much load should be shared by a system to unload a damaged disc?
Short-term results are not a barometer of an implants efficacy. Long-term concern is about the implant failing in view of constant motion of the stabilized segment, witness by failure in the Dynesys a few years ago. A load-sharing device should be uniform during the entire ROM. A discrepancy in the kinematics between the implant and the motion segment will lead to variability of load-sharing.
So where does that leave us? It leaves us with a host of old and new products that are attempting to answer questions and create a niche market so that surgeons can stage a patient's modality of treatment. Yet, why all the publicity? In all likelihood because there are many early-growth stage companies that have IP on different designs for DSS and they need CAPITAL to execute. The Spine Blogger wants to know what its readers believe?