Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

The artificial intervertebral disk

N J Guinn

    Today'S OR Nurse
    |July 1, 1994
    PubMed
    Summary

    Spinal fusion for low back pain may harm adjacent spinal segments. Artificial disk replacement offers motion preservation, reduced adjacent segment stress, and faster recovery.

    Related Concept Videos

    You might also read

    Related Articles

    Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

    Sort by
    Same author

    Percutaneous laser diskectomy. An alternative method.

    Today's OR nurse·1993
    Same author

    Hiding in plain sight: detection of oral cancer.

    Today's OR nurse·1990
    Same author

    Dental implants. Permanent replacement for lost teeth.

    AORN journal·1990
    Same author

    Organ procurement in the community hospital.

    Today's OR nurse·1988

    Area of Science:

    • Orthopedics
    • Spine Surgery
    • Biomedical Engineering

    Background:

    • Spinal fusion is a common treatment for low back pain and degenerative disc disease.
    • Concerns exist regarding the potential for adjacent segment disease following spinal fusion due to biomechanical changes.
    • Internal fixation in spinal fusion creates rigidity, potentially accelerating degeneration in nearby motion segments.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To evaluate the outcomes of artificial disc replacement compared to spinal fusion.
    • To highlight the advantages of artificial disc replacement in managing spinal conditions.

    Main Methods:

    • This study reviews the biomechanical and clinical implications of spinal fusion versus artificial disc replacement.
    • Comparative analysis of patient recovery times and long-term effects on adjacent spinal segments.

    Main Results:

    • Artificial disc replacement preserves spinal motion, unlike fusion.
    • It does not increase pressure on adjacent discs, mitigating adjacent segment disease risk.
    • Patients undergoing artificial disc replacement typically experience shorter recovery periods.

    Conclusions:

    • Artificial disc replacement presents a viable alternative to spinal fusion for specific spinal pathologies.
    • The procedure offers significant benefits including motion preservation and reduced risk of adjacent segment degeneration.
    • Shorter recovery times enhance patient satisfaction and functional restoration.

    Related Experiment Videos