U-implants of Ukrainian production at lumbar spine stenosis (making and clinical application)


  • Yuriy Pedachenko Department of Miniinvasive and Laser Spinal Neurosurgery, Romodanov Neurosurgery Institute, Kiev; Department of Neurosurgery, Shupyk National Medical Academy of Postgraduate Education, Kiev, Ukraine
  • Sergey Sheykin Department of Perspective Resourcesaving Technologies of Mechanical Processing, V Bakul Institute for Superhard Materials, Kiev, Ukraine
  • Pavel Markovskiy Department of Physics of Strength and Plasticity of Inhomogeneous Alloys, GV Kurdyumov Institute for Metall Physics, Kiev, Ukraine
  • Elena Krasilenko Romodanov Neurosurgery Institute, Kiev; Institute of Nuclear Medicine and Diagnostic Radiology, Kiev, Ukraine




spinal stenosis, interspinous fixation, U-implant, neurogenic claudication


The purpose. To evaluate the possibility of U-implants of Ukrainian production application at treatment of lumbar spine stenosis.

Material and methods. Numerous studies (chemical, microscopic, phase analysis) of alloy and strength characteristics of Coflex implant were conducted that gave a possibility to create and successfully conduct clinical trials of new Ukrainian U-implant, characterized from their foreign counterparts both in composition and form, and also to obtain a certificate of state registration.

Results. Chemical analysis showed that the product, according to the classification adopted in the world, corresponds to alloy Grade 5, or Ti-6Al-4V, the analogue of the alloy BT6. This alloy application provides better strength characteristics of the product while maintaining it’s plasticity. Application of the Ukrainian implant in clinical practice in 11 cases allowed to reach full recourse of clinical symptoms in the early postoperative period.

Conclusions. Application of a new Ukrainian U-implant after interspinous fixation and preliminary decompression is an effective method for treatment at lumbar spine stenosis.

U-implant of Ukrainian production has a number of positive technical features that improve it’s characteristics.

Author Biography

Elena Krasilenko, Romodanov Neurosurgery Institute, Kiev; Institute of Nuclear Medicine and Diagnostic Radiology, Kiev

Department of Miniinvasive and Laser Spinal Neurosurgery


1. Schlegel J, Smith J, Schleusener R. Lumbar Motion Segment Pathology Adjacent to Thoracolumbar, Lumbar, and Lumbosacral Fusions. Spine. 1996;21(8):970-981. [CrossRef]

2. Molina M, Wagner P, Campos M. Spinal lumbar stenosis. An update. Rev. Med. Chil. 2011;139:1488–1495. [CrossRef]

3. Verbiest H. Results of surgical treatment of idiopathic developmental stenosis of the lumbar vertebral canal: a review of 27 years experience. J. Bone Joint Surg. Br. 1977;59:181–188. [PubMed]

4. Tuite G, Stern J, Doran S, Papadopoulos S, McGillicuddy J, Oyedijo D, Grube S, Lundquist C, Gilmer H, Schork M. Outcome after laminectomy for spinal stenosis. Part I: Clinical correlations. J. Neurosurg. 1994;81(5):699-706 [CrossRef]

5. Kanamiya T, Kida H, Seki M, Aizawa T, Tabata S. Effect of Lumbar Disc Herniation on Clinical Symptoms in Lateral Recess Syndrome. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research. 2002;398:131-135. [CrossRef]

6. Kaner T, Ozer A. Dynamic Stabilization for Challenging Lumbar Degenerative Diseases of the Spine: A Review of the Literature. Advances in Orthopedics. 2013;2013:1-13. [CrossRef]

7. Li CD, Sun HL, Lu HZ. Comparison of the effect of posterior lumbar interbody fusion with pedicle screw fixation and interspinous fixation on the stiffness of adjacent segments. Chin Med J (Engl). 2013;126(9):1732-1737. [PubMed]

8. Nachanakian A, El Helou A, Alaywan M.The interspinous spacer: a new posterior dynamic stabilization concept for prevention of adjacent segment disease. Adv Orthop. 2013;2013:637362. [CrossRef]

9. Wilke HJ, Drumm J, Häussler K, Mack C, Kettler A. Biomechanics of interspinous spacers. Orthopade. 2010 Jun;39(6):565-572. [CrossRef]

10. Serhan HA, Varnavas G, Dooris AP, Patwadhan A, Tzermiadianos M. Biomechanics of the posterior lumbar articulating elements. Neurosurg Focus. 2007 Jan 15;22(1):E1. [PubMed]

11. Davis R, Errico T, Bae H, Auerbach J. Decompression and Coflex Interlaminar Stabilization Compared With Decompression and Instrumented Spinal Fusion for Spinal Stenosis and Low-Grade Degenerative Spondylolisthesis. Spine. 2013;38(18):1529–1539. [CrossRef]

12. Kuklo TR, Potter BK, Ludwig SC, Anderson PA, Lindsey RW, Vaccaro AR. Radiographic measurement techniques for sacral fractures consensus statement of the Spine Trauma Study Group. Spine. 2006;31(9):1047–1055. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

13. Borisova EA, Bochvar GA, Brun MYA [et all]. Metallografiya titanovykh splavov. [ Metallography titanium alloys.] Moscow: Metallurgiya; 1980. Russian.

14. Lutjering G, Williams J. Titanium. Berlin:Springer; 2003.

15. Tumanov AT., editor. Aviatsionnyye materialy: t.5. Titanovyye splavy. Moscow: VIAM; 1973. Russian.

16. Il'in AA, Kolachev BA, Pol'kin IS. Titanovyye splavy. Sostav, struktura, svoystva. [Titanium alloys. The composition, structure and properties]. Moscow:VILS-MATI; 2009. Russian.

17. Il'in A, Skvortsova S, Mamonov A., Karpov V. Production of medical implants from titanium base materials. Metally. 2002;3:97–104. Russian. [eLIBRARY.ru]



How to Cite

Pedachenko, Y., Sheykin, S., Markovskiy, P., & Krasilenko, E. (2014). U-implants of Ukrainian production at lumbar spine stenosis (making and clinical application). Ukrainian Neurosurgical Journal, (2), 36–41. https://doi.org/10.25305/unj.51299



Original articles