Go Back   ISPINE.ORG Forum > Main forums > iSpine
FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

iSpine Discuss Considering DIAM surgery for DDD in the Main forums forums; I have been accepted into the FDA clinical trial for the DIAM surgery. I have (so far) heard nothing negative ...

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 08-26-2013, 05:36 AM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1
Default Considering DIAM surgery for DDD

I have been accepted into the FDA clinical trial for the DIAM surgery. I have (so far) heard nothing negative about it. I have ddd L1-L5. Please post if you have had the surgery or know of anyone who has. Thanks!
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 12-08-2013, 07:03 AM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3
Default

I was recommended the DIAM device for DDD, but it is not an approved device in Australia (where I live) which made it expensive. I read a lot about it and everything seemed positive, the biggest issue seemed a limited history for it's use in this (standalone) way. The risks seem much lower than ADR with the god given disc not having to be removed - thus less invasive surgery and other options preserved. There a few articles one by Josip Buric which provided a 24 mth follow up - all good. Ultimately, I pursed ADR (ProDiscL), but would not have done so if the DIAM device was covered. I will be very interested to read about your progress - which I expect will be quick.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 12-10-2013, 08:00 PM
mmglobal's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,511
Default

The indications for ADR vs. DIAM are very different. DIAM is a motion limiting device while total disc replacements like ProDisc are motion restoring and motion preservation devices.

I've not heard of ADR following DIAM (or any other interspineous spacer). If the interspineous spacer would be left in place, how much motivation is there for ADR as the interspineous spacer would be defeating the purpose of the ADR? If the spacer is removed, I wonder about the stability of the system for ADR. The interspineous ligament would have been sacrificed... does the lack of it have implications for ADR?

ALS9082... any update? (I hope you don't mind, but I'm moving this thread to the main forum.)

Mark
__________________
1997 MVA
2000 L4-5 Microdiscectomy/laminotomy
2001 L5-S1 Micro-d/lami
2002 L4-S1 Charite' ADR - SUCCESS!
2009 C3-C4, C5-C6-C7, T1-T2 ProDisc-C Nova
Summer 2009, more bad thoracic discs!
Life After Surgery Website
President: Global Patient Network, Inc.
Founder: www.iSpine.org
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 12-11-2013, 08:11 PM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3
Default

In relation to the points raised by mm global in their informative reply, all I can say is that an experienced spine surgeon told me that DIAM was a much less invasive and thus risky procedure to address pain associated with DDD. He also said that if it didn't work it could be removed and all other surgical options (essential fusion v ADR) remained open.

Having had ADR 4 weeks ago and suffering ongoing radiculopthic pain in my hitherto healty foot, I am battling with personal doubts around the decision I made. I am lamenting not pursuing this more graduated approach having decided non-surgical treatments could not help.

The point you make about the inner spinous ligament would seem critical in understanding whether her all options in fact are preserved following implantation of the DIAM device and thus the whether this 'graduated strategy' was open to me.

I look toward to learning more from ALS9082.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT. The time now is 12:03 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.