Centinel Spine announced Investigational Device Exemption approval from FDA to initiate a two-level clinical trial with prodisc® C Vivo and prodisc C SK anterior cervical total disc replacement devices (TDRs).
The two-level prospective, randomized study will evaluate the devices at multiple sites throughout the U.S., comparing them to an existing TDR currently approved by FDA for two-level indications to validate their safety and effectiveness.
prodisc C Vivo has been used ex-U.S. since 2009. prodisc C SK is a variation of prodisc C Nova, an implant used ex-U.S. since 2010.
prodisc C Vivo and prodisc C SK employ the same mechanism of action as the currently-marketed prodiscC implant that was granted premarket approval in 2007. Their principal difference lies in the way in which the devices interface with the vertebral body; the variations are intended to allow a better match of the implant to a patient’s anatomy.
Source: Centinel Spine, LLC
Centinel Spine announced Investigational Device Exemption approval from FDA to initiate a two-level clinical trial with prodisc® C Vivo and prodisc C SK anterior cervical total disc replacement devices (TDRs).
The two-level prospective, randomized study will evaluate the devices at multiple sites throughout the U.S., comparing them to an...
Centinel Spine announced Investigational Device Exemption approval from FDA to initiate a two-level clinical trial with prodisc® C Vivo and prodisc C SK anterior cervical total disc replacement devices (TDRs).
The two-level prospective, randomized study will evaluate the devices at multiple sites throughout the U.S., comparing them to an existing TDR currently approved by FDA for two-level indications to validate their safety and effectiveness.
prodisc C Vivo has been used ex-U.S. since 2009. prodisc C SK is a variation of prodisc C Nova, an implant used ex-U.S. since 2010.
prodisc C Vivo and prodisc C SK employ the same mechanism of action as the currently-marketed prodiscC implant that was granted premarket approval in 2007. Their principal difference lies in the way in which the devices interface with the vertebral body; the variations are intended to allow a better match of the implant to a patient’s anatomy.
Source: Centinel Spine, LLC
You are out of free articles for this month
Subscribe as a Guest for $0 and unlock a total of 5 articles per month.
You are out of five articles for this month
Subscribe as an Executive Member for access to unlimited articles, THE ORTHOPAEDIC INDUSTRY ANNUAL REPORT and more.
JV
Julie Vetalice is ORTHOWORLD's Editorial Assistant. She has covered the orthopedic industry for over 20 years, having joined the company in 1999.