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/New Data Released for Luna Expandable ALIF Cage
Spine

New Data Released for Luna Expandable ALIF Cage

October 9, 2019 2 min read Premium comments

Advertisement

New Data Released for Luna Expandable ALIF Cage
Courtesy of Benvenue Medical, Inc.
Secondary#anteriorlumbarinterbodyfusion#mistlif#benvenuemedical#lunadevice

Santa Clara, California-based Benvenue Medical, Inc. has released new 12-month clinical data for its Luna expandable cage for lumbar interbody fusion.

Richard G. Fessler, M.D., Ph.D. of Rush University, led the study and presented his results in a paper titled, “Biomechanical and Minimum One Year Clinical Results of a Novel 3-D Expandable Cage for Lumbar Interbody Fusion,” at the annual meeting of the North American Spine Society.

For the study, Dr. Fessler collected data from 47 consecutive MIS TLIF patients and found that lordosis was maintained or improved equally between the Luna lordotic cage and parallel cages. Dr. Fessler also reported that back pain and leg pain were equally relieved for both cages and that the patients in the study achieved a fusion rate of 95%.

Fessler reported that patient outcomes were improved as compared to their pre-operative condition, that disc height appeared to be restored as was foraminal height. According to Fessler, these findings suggest that the larger footprint of the Luna expandable Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF) cage combined with the preservation of the anterior soft-tissue tension band may provide a better biomechanical fusion environment, combining the advantages of the traditional Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion (ALIF) and TLIF approaches.

In a separate independent analysis of Fessler’s biomechanical data, he reported that the TLIF delivery of the Luna cage performed better in reducing intervertebral motion than the ALIF control cage.

“The Luna data shows an excellent correction of disc space height and foraminal height,” said Dr. Fessler. “There was a strong correlation between that correction and clinical outcomes. It’s the most exciting interbody device that I’ve seen in my career—it can be put in through a TLIF exposure but expands into ALIF coverage. It achieves both of my surgical goals of being minimally invasive and offering maximal coverage.”

“The results from this study confirm that our Luna interbody cage provides improved outcomes for patients with degenerative disc disease,” said Robert K. Weigle, CEO of Benvenue Medical. “We are thrilled to offer an interbody cage device that utilizes the smallest incision while providing the largest implant footprint designed to afford surgeons a large graft chamber to facilitate fusion success, maximum height restoration, optimized sagittal balance, and minimal subsidence with consistent deployment.”

Asked about the decrease in the ODI [Oswestry Disability Index] scores, Rob Weigle told OTW, “In the lordotic cases, the median was lowered from 32 to 12; in the parallel cases, the median was lowered from 30 to 16.”

“There is a clear need for technology that allows physicians to provide cost-effective, minimally invasive lumbar fusion procedures to patients, with the goal of improving overall quality of life and reducing pain. Together with our Orbit discectomy tools, we have developed a solution that offers surgeons a larger implant footprint via a minimally invasive approach. We believe this combination of products will change the future of minimally invasive lumbar fusion not only in the hospital but also in the ASC [ambulatory surgery center] setting.”

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