LinkedInXFacebook
Subscribe
Orthopedics This Week
  • My Feed
  • |Posts
  • |Events
  • |MSK Innovations
  • |Power Rankings
  • |Masterclasses
  • |Technology Awards
  • Press Releases
  • |Advertising
  • |Job Board
  • Spine
  • ◆Joints
  • ◆Upper Extremities
  • ◆Foot & Ankle
  • ◆Sports Medicine
  • ◆Pain Mgmt
  • ◆Trauma
  • ◆Biologics
  • ◆Technology
  • ◆People
  • ◆Company News
  • ◆Legal & Regulatory
Home/Spine/FDA Clearance for Camber Spine’s ALIF System
Spine

FDA Clearance for Camber Spine’s ALIF System

June 12, 2018 2 min read Premium comments

Advertisement

FDA Clearance for Camber Spine’s ALIF System
ENZA-A ALIF System / Courtesy of Camber Spine Technologies
Secondary#anteriorlumbarinterbodyfusion#fdaclearance

Camber Spine Technologies has won FDA 510(k) clearance for its second device in the company’s ENZA-line of implants.

On June 4, 2018, the Wayne, Pennsylvania, spine company announced the clearance of its ENZA-A Titanium Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion (ALIF) system, “a unique, minimally invasive interbody fusion device providing integrated fixation.”

Company CEO Daniel Pontecorvo said the newly cleared system leverages two of the company’s “highly innovative platform technologies. The vast interest and success of our first generation ENZA (PEEK) with Duo Presa (Two Grips) anchor technology and our line of SPIRA products with Surface By Design, inspired us to combine their defining attributes to create this next generation ENZA-A Titanium ALIF.”

Indications

The system “…is indicated for use with autogenous bone graft in patients with degenerative disc disease at one or two contiguous levels from L2 to S1”…and “is intended to be used with additional FDA-cleared supplementary fixation systems implanted via a laparoscopic or an open anterior approach.”

According to the FDA document description, the device’s superior and inferior surfaces, “have a rough surface to help prevent movement of the device while fusion takes place.”

The system consists of a 3D printed titanium body with a roughened surface “that encourages bone growth onto the cranial and caudal surfaces of the device. The upper and lower faces are deliberately designed with pores that average 500 microns in diameter, the optimal environment for bone to grow and fully incorporate the implant with the vertebral bodies.”

“It has multiple openings to allow a large volume of autogenous bone graft to be packed into the implant to further facilitate fusion. Similar to the original ENZA, it has two sharpened anchor plates housed within the 3D-printed body until they are deployed into the adjacent vertebrae to provide fixation.”

Advertisement

The system is intended to be used with additional FDA-cleared supplementary fixation systems and must be used with autogenous graft material.

Substantial Equivalence

The FDA determined the device was substantially equivalent to the company’s ENZA Zero-Profile Anterior interbody fusion device and its SPIRA Open Matrix ALIF Device with respect to indications, design, materials, function, manufacturing, and/or performance.

The agency received the company’s clearance notification in early November 2017 and granted clearance on April 18, 2018.

The company said it expects to launch additional products later this year. “This interbody, coupled with additional product launches expected later this year in the cervical and lateral markets, will continue to grow Camber Spine’s presence as a market leader and innovator in minimally invasive spine surgery technology advancements.”

React:

Discussion

14
DS
Dr. Sarah MitchellOrthopedic Surgeon · Mayo Clinic

This is a fascinating development. In my practice we've seen similar outcomes with the revised protocol. The key differentiator seems to be patient selection criteria. Has anyone else noticed the correlation with BMI thresholds?

8
JT
James Thornton, MDSpine Fellow · HSS

Great point. I'd push back slightly on the conclusion, the sample size in the cited study is too small to draw population-level inferences. That said, the directional signal is compelling and worth a larger RCT.

5
RP
R. PatelSports Medicine · Stanford

We implemented a similar approach last year. Early results are promising but we're still gathering 12-month follow-up data. Happy to share our protocol if anyone is interested.

Join the conversation

Orthopedic professionals are discussing this. Sign in and upgrade to read every comment and add your voice.

Subscribe

Get Full Access

Read every OTW article and join member discussions for $24.99/month.

Get Full Access

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Orthopedics This Week

The most trusted source in orthopedic industry news since 2005. Covering spine, joints, trauma, biologics, and the business of orthopedics.

A publication of RRY Publications, LLC

LinkedInXFacebook

Categories

  • Spine
  • Joints
  • Upper Extremities
  • Foot & Ankle
  • Sports Medicine
  • Pain Mgmt
  • Trauma
  • Biologics
  • Technology
  • People
  • Company News
  • Legal & Regulatory

Resources

  • Subscribe
  • Community Posts
  • Job Board
  • Press Release Opportunities
  • Power Rankings
  • About OTW
  • Advertise
  • Contact Us

Get Full Access

Unlimited articles, community posts, and Power Rankings.

Get Full Access

Plans start at $24.99/mo · Annual saves 20%

© 2026 Orthopedics This Week · RRY Publications, LLC

Privacy PolicyTerms of ServiceCookie Policy