In a study comparing expandable and static lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) devices, at 2-year follow-up, radiographic evidence indicated no implant subsidence in patients treated with expandable devices, with a finding of subsidence in 16% of levels treated with static spacers.
The study assessed outcomes of 56 patients, including 29 who underwent LLIF with a static spacer and 27 with an expandable spacer. All were supplemented with transpedicular posterior fixation.
Globus Medical offers over 20 expandable implant systems, including the recently-launched ELSA® AL and ELSA®-ATP lateral spacers.
The study, “Clinical and radiographic analysis of expandable versus static lateral lumbar interbody fusion devices with two-year follow-up,” is published in the Journal of Spine Surgery.
In a study comparing expandable and static lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) devices, at 2-year follow-up, radiographic evidence indicated no implant subsidence in patients treated with expandable devices, with a finding of subsidence in 16% of levels treated with static spacers.
The study assessed outcomes of 56 patients, including 29...
In a study comparing expandable and static lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) devices, at 2-year follow-up, radiographic evidence indicated no implant subsidence in patients treated with expandable devices, with a finding of subsidence in 16% of levels treated with static spacers.
The study assessed outcomes of 56 patients, including 29 who underwent LLIF with a static spacer and 27 with an expandable spacer. All were supplemented with transpedicular posterior fixation.
Globus Medical offers over 20 expandable implant systems, including the recently-launched ELSA® AL and ELSA®-ATP lateral spacers.
The study, “Clinical and radiographic analysis of expandable versus static lateral lumbar interbody fusion devices with two-year follow-up,” is published in the Journal of Spine Surgery.
Copy to clipboard 
