Centre de Documentation Campus Montignies
Horaires :
Lundi : 8h-18h30
Mardi : 8h-17h30
Mercredi 9h-16h30
Jeudi : 8h30-18h30
Vendredi : 8h30-12h30 et 13h-14h30
Votre centre de documentation sera exceptionnellement fermé de 12h30 à 13h ce lundi 18 novembre.
Egalement, il sera fermé de 12h30 à 13h30 ce mercredi 20 novembre.
Lundi : 8h-18h30
Mardi : 8h-17h30
Mercredi 9h-16h30
Jeudi : 8h30-18h30
Vendredi : 8h30-12h30 et 13h-14h30
Votre centre de documentation sera exceptionnellement fermé de 12h30 à 13h ce lundi 18 novembre.
Egalement, il sera fermé de 12h30 à 13h30 ce mercredi 20 novembre.
Bienvenue sur le catalogue du centre de documentation du campus de Montignies.
Détail de l'auteur
Auteur Hans Schauvliege |
Documents disponibles écrits par cet auteur
Ajouter le résultat dans votre panier Faire une suggestion Affiner la recherche
Implant failure following pedicle based dynamic stabilization of the lumbar spine / Hans Schauvliege in Acta Orthopaedica Belgica, Vol.87/1 (Mars 2021)
[article]
Titre : Implant failure following pedicle based dynamic stabilization of the lumbar spine Type de document : texte imprimé Auteurs : Hans Schauvliege ; Marc Du Bois ; Jan Verlooy Année de publication : 2021 Article en page(s) : p. 191-196 Note générale : https://doi.org/10.52628/87.1.24 Langues : Anglais (eng) Mots-clés : medical device pedicle based dynamic stabilization market authorization failure product liability Résumé : Pedicle-based dynamic stabilization (PBDS) devices such as Dynesys are promoted as an alternative and less invasive option for rigid stabilization of one and even more levels of the lumbar spine. Promising features of the Dynesys system, as well as shortcomings, became obvious in several clinical studies. Since 2012, we started using a new PBDS device as an alternative for the Dynesys, to avoid the screw loosening and the kyphosing effect.
The objective is to compare failure rates between the Dynesys and Balan-C type PBDS implant and factors affecting outcome.
In a retrospective study we investigated a total of 90 patients with lumbar pedicle screw dynamic stabilization (a group of 64 patiënts with Dynesys stabilization is compared to a group of 26 patients with Balan-C stabilization). Mean follow-up was 48 and 38 months, respectively. Using logistic regression analysis the impact of baseline characteristics such as gender, age, body mass index (BMI), indication for surgery, primary or revision surgery, single versus more level surgery, surgeon’s experience and type of the implant on implant failure was analyzed.
We found a statistically significant difference in failure rates between the two systems (13% in the Dynesys group versus 62% in the Balan-C group). In multivariate analysis, type of implant was associated with implant failure (odds ratio : 13).
Our current results call for an optimization of the pre-and post-marketing surveillance of pedicle-based dynamic stabilization.Permalink : ./index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=96607
in Acta Orthopaedica Belgica > Vol.87/1 (Mars 2021) . - p. 191-196[article] Implant failure following pedicle based dynamic stabilization of the lumbar spine [texte imprimé] / Hans Schauvliege ; Marc Du Bois ; Jan Verlooy . - 2021 . - p. 191-196.
https://doi.org/10.52628/87.1.24
Langues : Anglais (eng)
in Acta Orthopaedica Belgica > Vol.87/1 (Mars 2021) . - p. 191-196
Mots-clés : medical device pedicle based dynamic stabilization market authorization failure product liability Résumé : Pedicle-based dynamic stabilization (PBDS) devices such as Dynesys are promoted as an alternative and less invasive option for rigid stabilization of one and even more levels of the lumbar spine. Promising features of the Dynesys system, as well as shortcomings, became obvious in several clinical studies. Since 2012, we started using a new PBDS device as an alternative for the Dynesys, to avoid the screw loosening and the kyphosing effect.
The objective is to compare failure rates between the Dynesys and Balan-C type PBDS implant and factors affecting outcome.
In a retrospective study we investigated a total of 90 patients with lumbar pedicle screw dynamic stabilization (a group of 64 patiënts with Dynesys stabilization is compared to a group of 26 patients with Balan-C stabilization). Mean follow-up was 48 and 38 months, respectively. Using logistic regression analysis the impact of baseline characteristics such as gender, age, body mass index (BMI), indication for surgery, primary or revision surgery, single versus more level surgery, surgeon’s experience and type of the implant on implant failure was analyzed.
We found a statistically significant difference in failure rates between the two systems (13% in the Dynesys group versus 62% in the Balan-C group). In multivariate analysis, type of implant was associated with implant failure (odds ratio : 13).
Our current results call for an optimization of the pre-and post-marketing surveillance of pedicle-based dynamic stabilization.Permalink : ./index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=96607 Exemplaires (1)
Cote Support Localisation Section Disponibilité Revue Revue Centre de Documentation HELHa Campus Montignies Armoires à volets Document exclu du prêt - à consulter sur place
Exclu du prêt