Ask Lisa Master Class: Motion Preservation 20 Years After Charite

[@varuninnz]

@7:00 - Seriously, I'm a big fan of your work but Simplify hasn't been in the market long enough to confirm superiority over ACDF in the LONG term eg 10 years. It's still classified as a new disc and barely commercially used for 4 years. This is important because when the M6 devices came out. You had surgeons jumping onto them and telling people prodisc is crap due to it's 3 piece semi constrained nature degrading the facets overtime and M6 is superior being made out viscoelastic technology. Yet it took 8 years to realise oh shit it's burning disaster. Yet the only disc so far that's stood the test of time is Prodisc after so many years even though it's a 3 piece mechanical device consisting of older technology... I also hope the study compared patients with similar injuries who had ACDF to Simplify ADR because generally speaking ACDF is used to treat with much more complicated cases in comparising to ADR eg oesteoporosis, facet arthritis, fractures, etc. This is another reason why in ADR you have such a small percentage of patients who are consider good ADR candidates vs ACDF which can cover a much wider range of ADR Contraindications. So naturally ADR may have better results because the patient injuries are less severe in the ADR candidates who may be fit young and healthy vs my grandma who's older with weaker bones, more facet degeneration etc and hence she may even take longer to recover