Biomechanical behavior of two different cervical total disc replacement designs in relation of concavity of articular surfaces: ProDisc-C® vs. Prestige-LP®

The Effect of Deviated Center of Rotation on Flexion-Extension Range of Motion After Single-Level Cervical Arthroplasty

“…24 Studies comparing the sagittal kinematics of Prestige LP with ProDisc-C showed that the postoperative COR was above the middle of the disc space with Prestige LP and below the middle of the disc space with ProDisc-C 18 , 32 These fi ndings suggested that the location of postoperative COR was highly correlated with artifi cial disc design. One possible interpretation could be associated with the ball-and-trough design, whereby the ball is on the upper plate, and therefore causing the COR to be allocated above the lower plate.…”

“…24 This design allows the fl exion-extension motion to be coupled with the anterior-posterior translation in the sagittal plane. The radius of curvature of the ball on the upper plate is smaller than that of the trough on the lower plate.…”

A Biomechanical Analysis of an Artificial Disc With a Shock-absorbing Core Property by Using Whole-cervical Spine Finite Element Analysis

“…Meanwhile, analytic research by Jung et al 37 reported that the COR is located in the intervertebral disc midpoint, leading to an inconclusive controversy regarding the COR location in each mobile cervical segment, with different results according to experimental methods. In this study, the COR location inside the C5-C6 motion segment during flexion was just below the intervertebral disc space center and close to the upper end plate of C6 during extension in the intact cervical spine model.…”

Hybrid Strategy of Cervical Artificial Disc and Intervertebral Cage – Biomechanical Effects on the Adjacent Tissues and Implants

“…1). The follower loads (73.6 N) were used to stabilize the cervicothoracic column and simulated by the tube-slider-cable mechanism in which the slider could slide along the tube hole and the springs were connected piece-by-piece by the sliders [19]. The tubes were placed at optimal sites posterior to the center of each vertebral body [21].…”

“…The calculated results were validated by the total disc angles for flexion, extension, bending, and rotation. For the facet forces, the current C3-C6 model was validated by the extension data of Jung et al [19] During the validation, the initially chosen elastic moduli of the disc and some ligaments were slightly modified within the physiological range to improve the consistency with the cadaveric results.…”