Simplify Disc is composed of medical polymer & ceramic
Simplify Disc is designed to preserve cervical range of motion
Simplify Disc has no metal wear from articulating components
Simplify Disc reduces exposure to high-doses of ionizing radiation
endplates and mobile
Endplate coating for
Retention ring keeps
core within disc
- Simplify Disc heights are designed to better match patients’ anatomies with disc heights ranging from 4mm to 6mm
- Anatomic heights may produce clinical results which could potentially benefit patients with smaller anatomies
- The tables to the right represent disc height data:
- On 545 untreated adjacent level discs (C3-4 to C6-7) to estimate normal disc height
- On 332 index level (treated) discs
- Average disc height was calculated as a mean of anterior and posterior disc height, not central disc height
Designed to Conform to Patient Anatomy
Simplify Disc maximum range of motion without anatomic constraint:
- +/- 12° flexion/extension
- +/-12° lateral bending
- Unconstrained in rotation
- Heights: 4mm, 5mm, 6mm
- Footprints: 12x15mm, 14x16mm, 16x18mm
The MRI Advantage
- MRI is the ideal screening method for evaluating patients with cervical myelopathy or radiculopathy3
- Simplify Disc is made of PEEK and ceramic composite, which allow the index level and adjacent tissues to be visualized when imaged using MRI
Step 1. Disc Sizing
Use Simplify Trial Instrument to select Simplify Disc size.
Step 2. Slot Cutting
Cut slot to accommodate Simplify Disc stabilizing fins.
Step 3. Disc Placement
Fully insert Simplify Disc as one unit.
Simplify Disc Minimizes Radiation Risks Associated with CT/Myelograms
- Invasive CT exams are routinely performed after cervical disc replacement, which exposes the patient to significant ionizing radiation
- “The average effective dose in cervical spine CTs is 5.0 mSv, which is the equivalent of 400 chest X-rays.” – Linet MS, et al. CA Cancer J Clin 2012.⁴
- Simplify Disc advanced polymer and ceramic composite materials are visible using MRI, and virtually eliminate the need for CTs
- MRI imaging is the most accurate and least invasive way to evaluate cervical discs and adjacent tissues post-operatively³
- FDA Initiative to Reduce Unnecessary Radiation Exposure from Medical Imaging
- The FDA recommends reducing radiation exposure to patients by the following:
•Ensure the CT exam is necessary
•Use other non-radiation exams when possible
•Avoid duplicate exams
•For more information please see our Educational Resources page and discuss with your physician.
CT scans using high-dose radiation have grown more than six-fold in the last 20 years.
- The radiation dose of CT scans are 100 to 1,000 times higher than conventional X-rays
- One in ten Americans undergo a CT scan every year
- A recent NY Times editorial said:
“The National Cancer Institute estimates that CT scans conducted in 2007 will cause a projected 29,000 excess cancer cases and 14,500 excess deaths over the lifetime of those exposed.”
Key Features & Benefits
- Anatomic in design
- Preserves range of motion (ROM)
- Composed of materials that permit the full diagnostic imaging capability of MRI
- Reduces exposure to high-dose ionizing radiation from CT scans
- Bony integration promoted with biocompatible¹ porous titanium endplate coating
- Disc heights as low as 4mm to treat a broad range of patients
- No metal wear from articulating components
- Inserts as one unit using a steamlined three-step procedure
1. Hallab NJ, et al. Macrophage reactivity to different polymers demonstrates particle size-and material-specific reactivity: PEEK-OPTIMA particles vs UHMWPE particles in the submicron, micron, and 10-micron size ranges. J Biomed Mater Res B. 2011. 100B (2); 480-92.
2. Assem Y., et al. Radiological and clinical outcomes of novel Ti/PEEK combined spinal fusion cages: a systematic review and preclinical evaluation. Eur Spine J. 2015 Dec 15.
3. Sundseth J, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging evaluation after implantation of a titanium cervical disc prosthesis: a comparison of 1.5 and 3 Tesla magnet strength. Eur Spine J 2013. 22:2296–2302.
4. Linet MS, et al. Cancer Risks Associated With External Radiation From Diagnostic Imaging Procedures. CA Cancer J Clin 2012; 62(2):75-100.