Sorry, for reasons I explained through the years, I believe the M6 is too complicated a design. I like the kinematics, moreso than most, but the number and complexity of materials give me some angst.
That said, many people have had this implanted in the last few years and most are doing well (but not all).
My bias is toward a design that requires minimal parts and simple design; with an attention to minimal surface areas which do not break over the long term or attract biofilm.
Since 2004, when I launched this site, has anyone here (or people reading), actually calculated the total surface area of an artificial disc implant? All the surfaces, including endplates and any exposed surfaces? Or when the protective sheath of the "next" generation disc fails, all the surface areas exposed to the immune system or infection? Similar disc designs have failed (including the M6) and had to explanted.
It is possible that the "next generation" of discs are over-engineered. That is only my opinion and concern. And it is one that bothers me and sometimes causes to me to lose sleep!
Speaking of that...
