Peer-Reviewed Articles

Below you can download and view peer-reviewed articles and abstracts relating to coflex® Interlaminar Technology that have been published, presented and discussed at various society meetings.

coflex® Interlaminar Technology Peer-Reviewed Article Archive 



Prospective, Randomized, Multicenter Study with 2 Year Follow-Up to Compare the Performance of Decompression with and without Interlaminar Stabilization 

Rauschmann M, Franke J, Schmidt S, Adelt D, Bonsanto M, Sola S 
Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine. E-pub before print. January 2018.



Evaluation of Decompression and Interlaminar Stabilization Compared with Decompression and Fusion for the Treatment of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: 5-year Follow-up of a Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Trial

 Musacchio M Jr., Lauryssen C, Davis R, Bae H, Peloza J, Guyer R, Zigler J, Ohnmeiss D, Leary S 

International Journal of Spine Surgery. January 2016.



Therapeutic Sustainability and Durability of coflex Interlaminar Stabilization After Decompression for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

Bae H, Lauryssen C, Bae H, Maislin G, Leary S, Musacchio M Jr. 
International Journal of Spine Surgery. May 2015.



Davis R, Errico T, Bae H,  Auerbach J

Spine. August 2013, Volume 38, Issue 18, Pages 1529 – 1539.



Can low-grade spondylolisthesis be effectively treated by either coflex interlaminar stabilization or laminectomy and posterior spinal fusion? Two-year clinical and radiographic results from the randomized, prospective, multicenter US investigational device exemption trial.

Davis R, Auerbach J, Bae H, Errico T

Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine. August 2013, Volume 19, Issue 2, Pages 174  184.



Determination of the In Vivo Posterior Loading Environment of the coflex® Interlaminar-Interspinous Implant

Trautwein F, Lowery G, Wharton N, Hipp J, Chomiak R

The Spine Journal. March 2010, Volume 10, Issue 3, Pages 244 – 251.


Comparative Cost Effectiveness of Coflex® Interlaminar Stabilization Versus Instrumented Posterolateral Lumbar Fusion for the Treatment of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis and Spondylolisthesis.

Schmier J, Halevi M, Maislin G, Ong K

ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research. March 2014, Volume 2014, Issue 6, Pages 125 – 131.


Kumar N, Shah S, Hong Ng Y, Pannierselvam V, DasDe S, Shen L

Asian Spine Journal. April 2014, Volume 8, Issue 2, Pages161 – 169. English.


Neurosurgical Focus. June 2014, Volume 36, Issue 6, Page E5.


Survivorship of coflex® Interlaminar-Interspinous Implant

Errico T, Kamerlink J, Quirno M, Samani J, Chomiak R

SAS Journal. June 2009, Volume 3, Issue 2, Pages 59 – 67.


Frequentist Operating Characteristics of Bayesian Posterior Probability Designs for Medical Device Trials that Include a Single, Late-information-time, Interim Analysis

Maislin, G

JSM 2011.


coflex® Interlaminar Technology Abstracts

Decompression and Implantation of an Interlaminar Stabilization Implant for the Treatment of LSS with Back Pain: Four Year Data

Davis R, Bae H, Errico T, Lauryssen C, Leary S


Direct Neurologic Decompression Improves Functional Neurologic Outcomes in Spinal Stenosis and Low grade Spondylolisthesis_ A Comparison of coflex, Laminectomy, Spinal Fusion, XStop.pdf

Auerbach J, Lauryssen C, Davis R


Auerbach J, Sears W


Perioperative Outcomes, Complications, and Costs Associated with Lumbar Spinal Fusion in Older Patients with Spinal Stenosis and Spondylolisthesis_ Analysis of the United States Medicare Claims Database.pdf

Auerbach J, Ong K, Lau E, Ochoa J, Schmier J, Zigler J


coflex-F® Interlaminar Stabilization Abstracts

Radiographic Evaluation of a Novel Interspinous,Interlaminar Fusion Implant (coflex-F®)System to Augment Lumbar Interbody Fusion.pdf

Afshar H, Eif M, Schenke H, Auerbach J




Disclaimer: Information regarding the use of products outside the United States is provided for educational purposes only, and does not represent promotion, claims, or intended use outside approved U.S. labeling.