Controversies about Interspinous Process Devices in the Treatment of Degenerative Lumbar Spine Diseases: Past, Present, and Future

Table 2

Relevant Biomechanical studies on interspinous devices.

Author	Device	Year	Cases	Study	Evaluation	Results
Swanson et al. [52]	X-Stop	2003	8	Cadaver	Intradiscal pressure	Unloading of the disc
Lee et al. [35]	X-Stop	2004	10	Case series	Foraminal and spinal canal area	Increase of 22.3% spinal canal and 36.5% foraminal area
Zucherman et al. [38]	X-Stop	2005	191	Case series	X-ray assessment	No differences between 12 and 24 months
Richards et al. [37]	X-Stop	2005	8	Cadaver	Foraminal and spinal canal area	Increase of 18% spinal canal and 25% foraminal area in extension
Fuchs et al. [55]	X-Stop	2005	7	Cadaver	Assessment after facetectomy	Bilateral facetectomy increases range of motion
Wiseman et al. [53]	X-Stop	2005	7	Cadaver	Facet loading	Reduced mean peak pressure
Siddiqui et al. [45]	X-Stop	2006	26	Case series	Kinematics	Significant increase of spinal canal and foraminal area
Phillips et al. [60]	Diam	2006	6	Cadaver	Kinematics after facetectomy and discectomy	Reduces increased segmental motion after discectomy
Tsai et al. [42]	Coflex	2006	8	Cadaver	Kinematics	Returns a partially destabilized spine back to intact condition
Kong et al. [61]	Coflex	2007	42	Case series	Adjacent segment motion compared with PLIF	Increased in PLIF
Kim et al. [62]	Diam	2007	62	Case series	Disc height	No changes in disc height at 12 months
Lafage et al. [63]	Wallis	2007	6	Cadaver	Kinematics	Lower stress in disc fibers
Wilke et al. [8]	X-Stop/Diam	2008	24	Cadaver	Intradiscal pressure	Reduction of intradiscal pressure in extension