2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Biomechanical properties of lumbar vertebral ring apophysis cage under endplate injury: a finite element analysis

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objective

          This study aimed to compare the biomechanical properties of lumbar interbody fusion involving two types of cages. The study evaluated the effectiveness of the cage spanning the ring apophysis, regardless of the endplate's integrity.

          Methods

          A finite element model of the normal spine was established and validated in this study. The validated model was then utilized to simulate Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion (LLIF) with posterior pedicle screw fixation without posterior osteotomy. Two models of interbody fusion cage were placed at the L4/5 level, and the destruction of the bony endplate caused by curetting the cartilaginous endplate during surgery was simulated. Four models were established, including Model 1 with an intact endplate and long cage spanning the ring apophysis, Model 2 with endplate decortication and long cage spanning the ring apophysis, Model 3 with an intact endplate and short cage, and Model 4 with endplate decortication and short cage. Analyzed were the ROM of the fixed and adjacent segments, screw rod system stress, interface stress between cage and L5 endplate, trabecular bone stress on the upper surface of L5, and intervertebral disc pressure (IDP) of adjacent segments.

          Results

          There were no significant differences in ROM and IDP between adjacent segments in each postoperative model. In the short cage model, the range of motion (ROM), contact pressure between the cage and endplate, stress in L5 cancellous bone, and stress in the screw-rod system all exhibited an increase ranging from 0.4% to 79.9%, 252.9% to 526.9%, 27.3% to 133.3%, and 11.4% to 107%, respectively. This trend was further amplified when the endplate was damaged, resulting in a maximum increase of 88.6%, 676.1%, 516.6%, and 109.3%, respectively. Regardless of the integrity of the endplate, the long cage provided greater support strength compared to the short cage.

          Conclusions

          Caution should be exercised during endplate preparation and cage placement to maintain the endplate's integrity. Based on preoperative X-ray evaluation, the selection of a cage that exceeds the width of the pedicle by at least 5 mm (ensuring complete coverage of the vertebral ring) has demonstrated remarkable biomechanical performance in lateral lumbar interbody fusion procedures. By opting for such a cage, we expect a reduced occurrence of complications, including cage subsidence, internal fixation system failure, and rod fracture.

          Related collections

          Most cited references49

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Extreme Lateral Interbody Fusion (XLIF): a novel surgical technique for anterior lumbar interbody fusion.

          Minimally disruptive approaches to the anterior lumbar spine continue to evolve in a quest to reduce approach-related morbidity. A lateral retroperitoneal, trans-psoas approach to the anterior disc space allows for complete discectomy, distraction, and interbody fusion without the need for an approach surgeon. To demonstrate the feasibility of a minimally disruptive lateral retroperitoneal approach and the advantages to patient recovery. The extreme lateral approach (Extreme Lateral Interbody Fusion [XLIF]) is described in a step-wise manner. There have been no complications thus far in the author's first 13 patients. The XLIF approach allows for anterior access to the disc space without an approach surgeon or the complications of an anterior intra-abdominal procedure. Longer-term follow-up and data analysis are under way, but initial findings are encouraging.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Spinal pedicle fixation: reliability and validity of roentgenogram-based assessment and surgical factors on successful screw placement.

            The increased popularity of pedicle fixation prompted research to address two issues: the reliability and validity of roentgenograms as a technique for evaluating the success of pedicle fixation, and the effects of surgical factors on successful fixation. Thus, does approach--the point and angle of screw insertion, surgeon experience, practice, level of the spine involved, and screw size--effect success of pedicle fixation? Eight fresh thoracolumbar spines were harvested and cleaned of all soft tissues. Two surgeons, one more experienced in pedicle fixation than the other, used two pedicle fixation approaches (Weinstein and Roy-Camille) on both the left and right sides at levels T11-S1 of each specimen. All screws were placed under anteroposterior (AP) and lateral c-arm control. For specimens 1 to 3, 5.5 mm screws were used at T11-L1, and 7.0 mm screws at L2-S1. Unacceptable failure rates at L2 and L3 for the first three specimens resulted in a change of instrumentation for the remaining specimens, with 5.5 mm screws used at T11-L3 and 7.0 mm screws at L4-S1. When surgeons completed the fixations for a specimen, AP and lateral roentgenograms were taken and both surgeons independently evaluated the films to assess the success of each fixation. Failure was defined as evidence of any cortical perforation on any side of the pedicle in or outside of the spinal canal. After completing the roentgenogram evaluation, the specimen was transected in the midline, and the success of each pedicle fixation was evaluated by visual/tactile inspection. There were no disagreements between surgeons on the visual/tactile evaluations of the specimens.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Application of a calibration method provides more realistic results for a finite element model of a lumbar spinal segment.

              An important step in finite element modeling is the process of validation to derive clinical relevant data. It can be assumed that defect states of a finite element model, which have not been validated before, may predict wrong results. The purpose of this study was to show the differences in accuracy between a calibrated and a non-calibrated finite element model of a lumbar spinal segment for different clinical defects.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                wjydcg3724@163.com
                gengzm97@163.com
                1208863273@qq.com
                Ljcsx163@163.com
                zepeiwind@163.com
                mj6688@163.com
                liruihua8913@sina.com
                Journal
                BMC Musculoskelet Disord
                BMC Musculoskelet Disord
                BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
                BioMed Central (London )
                1471-2474
                30 August 2023
                30 August 2023
                2023
                : 24
                : 695
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.33763.32, ISNI 0000 0004 1761 2484, Department of Spine Surgery, , Tianjin Hospital, Tianjin University, ; No. 406 Jiefang South Rd, Hexi District, Tianjin, 300211 China
                [2 ]GRID grid.443397.e, ISNI 0000 0004 0368 7493, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Hainan Medical University, ; Haikou City, Hainan, China
                Article
                6792
                10.1186/s12891-023-06792-1
                10466841
                37649054
                aaa6c5bb-ee26-467c-8379-0a2825fc0c63
                © BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2023

                Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

                History
                : 9 May 2023
                : 10 August 2023
                Categories
                Research
                Custom metadata
                © BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2023

                Orthopedics
                lateral lumbar interbody fusion (llif),biomechanical evaluation,finite element analysis,cage subsidence

                Comments

                Comment on this article