That is the exact opposite of my intention. Charite's have been in place in real people for about 10-20 yrs depending on which version (current is #3) you are talking about. That is the only real, hard, provable life figure you can cite. Studies show life out to 40 to 50 years for the same disk design. The same kinds of studies show equivalent life for the other disk designs but they haven't been in bodies for long enough to matter. There have been few Charite failure and, in my ignorance, I don't know of any life related failures at all. All of the failures where the core failed that I've heard of were implantation failures first leading to core damage.

Maybe I should not have used the word LOTS , but I have read about failures , relating to te core and movement due to the positioning of the spikes. Of course most of the people that have had the charite are very pleased and it shows good results. I am just only voicing my own concerns and should be taken with a pinch of salt, I am just stating information what I have read on the internet. If you say that the discs that have a plastic core last for 40 to 50 years then perfect , that is the information I was looking for. As I don't want to put something in my body that will not last!
Very interesting debate's on this site , its very enjoyable to get all this information with so many people willing to share there Knowledge.

Like yourself James, I'm looking at multi-level ADR as well.

I'm grateful that fusion is quickly becoming outdated. I do not think I will be able to wait it out for the next generation of prosthetic discs which use a coin-shaped bladder filled with a gel that is more disc-like than the current mechanical artificial discs. I'll most likely end up with Prodisc or if I can wait it out, Maverick.

After literature review, email correspondence with surgeons, review of posts on multiple sites, and my own reasoning ability, I've come to the conclusion that in my case, the Maverick is the way to go based on exactly the concerns you've presented in your original post. One day I might be envious of patients that have re-grown discs with stem cells, but given the timeliness of the options presented to me, I think if all goes well I could be happy, certainly much happier than I am now, should I find a US surgeon skilled enough to do multi-level ADR using Maverick on a previously fused spine.

I wish you well with your decision.

my .02 worth. My surgeon has been doing Charitte for about 12 years and says he has never had to replace one due to product failure. Only once due to someone who started weight training 3 weeks after her surgery. If i have to do this 10 years from now, thats okay by me. That being said i am only 40 now. It might be different if i was 10 years older.

Thats good news , I guess you always get a few horror stories , I am sure we should not really worry. Not sure how many times you could have revision surgery though due to scar tissue build up. Does anyone know about this that could help explain ??

Well, Ive got the Maverick and I'm happy enough with it so far though it's only been nearly 8 weeks. Actually, I feel more confident with the design and the keel, I can't imagine it ever subsiding! I would have been happy with any disc I think, the decision on which (charite or maverick) I was getting wasn't decided till I was in theatre and my spine had been assessed.
With my whole back being in a pretty crook state, my surgeon has already said there shouldn't be an issue if I need further surgery, he'll just go in on the opposite side (right) next time.
Hmmm, now that's a sobering thought (not!)
Cathy

Let's not forget about the Kineflex, which is metal. I've had mine for a year now and it's been great. My surgeon is a Maverick co-inventor, and he likes the Kineflex. It's still in FDA studies.

Matt, I agree with some of your points, disagree on others. Your point about trials for device companies is off – FDA trials are kept “airtight” for many reasons – and it is in the company’s interest to ensure this to endure FDA and public scrutiny. And device companies don’t think they will fail; otherwise they wouldn’t spend the millions!

And it is true that far more devices have succeeded than failed, though this forum is about sharing ALL the experiences: good, bad and the “average” outcomes in between.

Quantitative outcome data is the Holy Grail. Yes, the clinical trials provide data, but it is less than ideal in terms of its “readability,” let along availability. Next year, as a newly formed non-profit, I’ll be tackling this issue and launching a rigorous patient survey. More on this in the coming months.