More facet arthroplasty data on Archus' new webpage

[annapurna]

Great news for facet sufferers who want MORE DATA on the still-in-development prosthetic devices. As promised, Archus Orthopedics finally updated their website and are, for the first time posting sketches of their devices, initial mechanical testing data (coming soon), and clinical trial inclusion/exclusion info, and even some design and test philosophy. I haven't read everything on the site yet, but it seems to resemble Texas Back and Link's older sites. Hopefully, they'll post some of their conference and peer-reviewed journal papers as well (copyright permitting). I can't wait for Facet Solutions, Impressa, and Quantum to follow suit so we can compare designs, mechanical test methods, clinical approaches, etc.

site: www.archusorthopedics.com

Best,
Laura

P.S. - Harrison, if this needs to go in another category, feel free to move it where-ever seems best.

[Harrison]

Laura, their makeover is no coincidence! Did you hear the news about JnJ's $35M "donation" for Archus? A very strategic move...give the number of patents Archus has in facet arthroplasty. E.g., their recently awarded patent from the USPTO:

United States Patent 6,974,478
Reiley , et al. December 13, 2005
Prostheses, systems and methods for replacement of natural facet joints with artificial facet joint surfaces

Abstract

Cephalad and caudal vertebral facet joint prostheses and methods of use are provided. The prostheses provide an artificial facet joint structure including an artificial articular configuration unlike the preexisting articular configuration. The radii and material stress values of the prostheses are configured to sustain contact stress. The cephalad prosthesis provides for posterior-anterior adjustment. Both prostheses permit lateral adjustment and adjustment to accomodate interpedicle distance. Further, the prostheses may be customized to provide a pre-defined lordotic angle and a pre-defined pedicle entry angle.

More on today's news here.

This facet biomechanics is really complex stuff. Laura, I hope that we can borrow your "secret decoder ring" from time to time. Or, how about if you translate on occasion?!



PS: I bet this particular patent will be challenged....time will tell.

[annapurna]

Thanks Harrison, I was not aware of JnJ's involvement. In a way, that could be a good sign since it would allow Archus to support a broader trial and marketing effort in Europe.

As far as the patent language goes, they all seem to be a bit cryptic. I'm not sure of the exact meaning of "cephalad" and "caudal", but it seems like they're describing the superior and inferior zyapophaseal (facet) joints. The device sustains contact stresses (good), and is more or less adjustable for a wide range of posterior spine shapes and sizes. This device is really intended to be a "bolt on posterior spinal segment" in a sense because it was developed for people who need such radical decompressions that they don't have much of the posterior structure left.

Maybe chirogeek or some of our other resident medical professionals can give us all a posterior spine anatomy lesson so we can keep up with all these exciting patent and literature articles.

As far as the patent being challenged, I'm not sure. Medicine Lodge, the main competition, has already secured patents of their own (links available on their website) and are pursuing a different design strategy. Medicine Lodge's device mimic's the natural shape and configuration of a healthy facet joint, whereas Archus's device has minic's the kinematics, dynamic loading, and motion range, but not necessarily the shape and configuration. The other two players in the facet game, Quantum (Zyre)and Impressa (TOPS) have more or less non-articulating devices, so, I can't imagine them being worried about patent infringement limitations. On the other hand, I'm not a patent attorney, so what do I know? It's fun to speculate though.

Best to All,
Laura

[Mariaa]

In terms of candidacy for these trials unless I'm reading it incorrectly if one has had any type of spinal device implanted in spine that would r/o candidacy. Previously fused patients would not be candidates; ADR also??