Ranier Cadisc™-C Update

[Researcher]

The following information contained in an email I received can not be confirmed. The statement is copied exactly as received, except for two deletions to maintain the anonymity of the source. It comes from a reliable, knowledgeable source, but this source does have a financial relationship with the manufacturer of a competing disc. As such, please exercise discretion in how you use this information or communicate it to others. This information is not intended to discredit Ranier Technology Limited in any way.

“ We do know a little about the Ranier Disc, it is from Cambridge which is about (deleted) miles from (deleted). The problem with the Disc is not the bonding of the surfaces together it is manufacturing the nucleus………..consistently! They can’t do it. They are trying to prove to Investors it is almost ready to go to market but as far as I am aware they have still not addressed this issue satisfactorily. I discussed it with one of their Scientists who had left because funding was being diverted to marketing and pre marketing preparations and the disc was not safe to launch yet. ”

Thanks,

Phil

[Justin]

Hi Phil,

Thank you for passing this information on to the Spine Patient Society. As stated above, please remember the information presented above represents one's opinion and should not be looked upon as fact.

[mike86]

Keep up the research!

It seems the manufacturing of this disc is very complicated due to the way the nucleus merges and converts into the annulus, but it's a genius concept!

[Researcher]

I also like the Ranier concept very much. The information revealed in my earlier post is simply that, just information, not my personal opinion. Designs that appear simple on the surface are often the most difficult to execute. I think in ten years we will probably see several successful artificial disc designs that will control the market (different discs for lumbar and cervical). The variety of discs will be supported by patient and surgeon choice along with the specific indications of patients, i.e. certain patients may have a particular structural weakness that makes a true 6 DOF disc inappropriate. Also, I think progress will be made with disc injection materials that will enable earlier preventive slowing of the degeneration process, eliminating the need for artificial discs for some people (too late for me).

Having worked for two start-up companies, I can sympathize with Ranier's challenge (technically complex engineering, high liability medical product, time sensitive market, expensive government regulations). I (and my wife) had enough of that working environment a few years ago.

Phil