Bilateral pedicle screw fixation provides superior biomechanical stability in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a finite element study

被引:203
作者
Ambati, Divya V. [1 ,2 ]
Wright, Edward K., Jr. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Lehman, Ronald A., Jr. [2 ,3 ]
Kang, Daniel G. [3 ]
Wagner, Scott C. [3 ]
Dmitriev, Anton E. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Henry M Jackson Fdn Adv Mil Med, Bethesda, MD 20817 USA
[2] Uniformed Serv Univ Hlth Sci, Div Surg, Bethesda, MD 20814 USA
[3] Walter Reed Natl Mil Med Ctr, Dept Orthopaed Surg, Bethesda, MD 20889 USA
关键词
Finite element method; Spine biomechanics; Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion; Interbody cage; Pedicle screw fixation; Lumbar spine; IN-VITRO; DEGENERATIVE SPONDYLOLISTHESIS; INSTRUMENTATION TECHNIQUES; POSTERIOR INSTRUMENTATION; LUMBOSACRAL SPINE; BONE-DENSITY; CAGES; ADJACENT; STABILIZATION; COMPLICATIONS;
D O I
10.1016/j.spinee.2014.06.015
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
100204 [神经病学];
摘要
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) is increasingly popular for the surgical treatment of degenerative lumbar disease. The optimal construct for segmental stability remains unknown. PURPOSE: To compare the stability of fusion constructs using standard (C) and crescent-shaped (CC) polyetheretherketone TLIF cages with unilateral (UPS) or bilateral (BPS) posterior instrumentation. STUDY DESIGN: Five TLIF fusion constructs were compared using finite element (FE) analysis. METHODS: A previously validated L3-L5 FE model was modified to simulate decompression and fusion at L4-L5. This model was used to analyze the biomechanics of various unilateral and bilateral TLIF constructs. The inferior surface of the L5 vertebra remained immobilized throughout the load simulation, and a bending moment of 10 Nm was applied on the L3 vertebra to recreate flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation. Various biomechanical parameters were evaluated for intact and implanted models in all loading planes. RESULTS: All reconstructive conditions displayed decreased motion at L4-L5. Bilateral posterior fixation conferred greater stability when compared with unilateral fixation in left lateral bending. More than 50% of intact motion remained in the left lateral bending with unilateral posterior fixation compared with less than 10% when bilateral pedicle screw fixation was used. Posterior implant stresses for unilateral fixation were six times greater in flexion and up to four times greater in left lateral bending compared with bilateral fixation. No effects on segmental stability or posterior implant stresses were found. An obliquely-placed, single standard cage generated the lowest cage-end plate stress. CONCLUSIONS: Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion augmentation with bilateral posterior fixation increases fusion construct stability and decreases posterior instrumentation stress. The shape or number of interbody implants does not appear to impact the segmental stability when bilateral pedicle screws are used. Increased posterior instrumentation stresses were observed in all loading modes with unilateral pedicle screw/rod fixation, which may theoretically accelerate implant loosening or increase the risk of construct failure. Published by Elsevier Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:1812 / 1822
页数:11
相关论文
共 54 条
[1]
Biomechanical comparison of posterior lumbar interbody fusion and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion performed at 1 and 2 levels [J].
Ames, CP ;
Acosta, FL ;
Chi, J ;
Iyengar, J ;
Muiru, W ;
Acaroglu, E ;
Puttlitz, CM .
SPINE, 2005, 30 (19) :E562-E566
[2]
A prospective randomized controlled study comparing transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion techniques for degenerative spondylolisthesis: unilateral pedicle screw and 1 cage versus bilateral pedicle screws and 2 cages Clinical article [J].
Aoki, Yasuchika ;
Yamagata, Masatsune ;
Ikeda, Yoshikazu ;
Nakajima, Fumitake ;
Ohtori, Seiji ;
Nakagawa, Koichi ;
Nakajima, Arata ;
Toyone, Tomoaki ;
Orita, Sumihisa ;
Takahashi, Kazuhisa .
JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY-SPINE, 2012, 17 (02) :153-159
[3]
BAGBY GW, 1988, ORTHOPEDICS, V11, P931
[4]
Beringer Will F, 2006, Neurosurg Focus, V20, pE4
[5]
Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: A retrospective study of Long-term pain relief and fusion outcomes [J].
Chastain, Cody A. ;
Eck, Jason C. ;
Hodges, Scott D. ;
Humphreys, S. Craig ;
Levi, Peggy .
ORTHOPEDICS, 2007, 30 (05) :389-392
[6]
Chen CS, 2001, MED ENG PHYS, V23, P483
[7]
Biomechanical analysis of unilateral fixation with interbody cages [J].
Chen, HH ;
Cheung, HH ;
Wang, WK ;
Li, A ;
Li, KC .
SPINE, 2005, 30 (04) :E92-E96
[8]
Biomechanical comparison of unilateral and bilateral pedicle screws fixation for transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion after decompressive surgery - a finite element analysis [J].
Chen, Shih-Hao ;
Lin, Shang-Chih ;
Tsai, Wen-Chi ;
Wang, Chih-Wei ;
Chao, Shih-Heng .
BMC MUSCULOSKELETAL DISORDERS, 2012, 13
[9]
Biomechanical comparison of instrumented posterior lumbar interbody fusion with one or two cages by finite element analysis [J].
Chiang, Ming-Fu ;
Zhong, Zheng-Cheng ;
Chen, Chen-Sheng ;
Cheng, Cheng-Kung ;
Shih, Shih-Liang .
SPINE, 2006, 31 (19) :E682-E689
[10]
Comparison of cage designs for transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: A biomechanical study [J].
Cho, Woojin ;
Wu, Chunhui ;
Mehbod, Amir A. ;
Transfeldt, Ensor E. .
CLINICAL BIOMECHANICS, 2008, 23 (08) :979-985