INTERNAL FORCES AND MOMENTS IN TRANSPEDICULAR SPINE INSTRUMENTATION - THE EFFECT OF PEDICLE SCREW ANGLE AND TRANSFIXATION - THE 4R-4BAR LINKAGE CONCEPT

被引:52
作者
CARSON, WL
DUFFIELD, RC
ARENDT, M
RIDGELY, BJ
GAINES, RW
机构
[1] Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Department, Columbia
[2] Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Missouri-Columbia, Columbia, MO
关键词
Biomechanics; Internal loads; Linkage instability; Pedicle angle; Pedicle screw; Spine implant; Structure; Transfixation;
D O I
10.1097/00007632-199009000-00011
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
The three-dimensional components of force and moment within the plates and screws of a bilevel transpedicular spine implant construct subjected to different physiolog-ical loads were determined by experimental and finite element methods. The effect of pedicle screw angle and transfixation were studied. Untransfixed 0° pedicle-to- pedicle (P-P) angle constructs with limited screw-bone torsional resistance are unstable 4R-4bar linkages. They will not resist lateral load or (when not in a rectangular position) axial load until the spinal column load shares. Untransfixed constructs with (0° < P-P angle < 60°) are structures. However, as P-P angle approaches 0°, the structure becomes more flexible (unstable) and some internal force and moment components exponentially increase (starting at approximately a 30° P-P angle). Transfixation eliminated the linkage instability and asso-ciated exponential increase in internal loads. These ob-servations apply to all bilevel systems that allow no relative joint motion between pedicle screw and longitudinal member. If relative motion does exist, other types of linkage instability can occur. © Lippincott-Raven Publishers.
引用
收藏
页码:893 / 901
页数:9
相关论文
共 26 条
[1]  
Aebi M., Etter C., Kehl T.H., Thalgott J., The internal skeletal fixation system, Clin Orthop, 227, pp. 30-43, (1988)
[2]  
Arendt M., Experimental Analysis of Internal Forces and Moments in Bilevel Transpedicular Spine Instrumentation
[3]  
Ashman R.B., Birch J.G., Bone L.B., Corin J.D., Herring J.A., Johnston I., Ritterbush J.F., Roach J.W., Mechanical testing of spinal instrumentation, Clin Orthop, 227, pp. 113-125, (1988)
[4]  
Cotrel Y., Dubousset J., Guillaumat M., New universal instrumentation in spinal surgery, Clin Orthop, 227, pp. 10-23, (1988)
[5]  
Esses S.I., The AO spinal internal fixator, Spine, 14, pp. 373-378, (1989)
[6]  
Ferguson R.L., Tencer A.F., Woodward P., Allen B.L., Biomechanical comparisons of spinal fracture models and the stabilizing effects of posterior instrumentations, Spine, 13, pp. 453-460, (1988)
[7]  
Fiddler M.W., Posterior instrumentation of the spine. An experimental comparison of various possible techniques, Spine, 11, pp. 367-372
[8]  
Gaines R.W., Carson W.L., Satterlee C.C., Gl G., Experimental Evaluation of Seven Different Spinal Fracture Internal Fixation Devices under Non-Failure Laboratory Testingthe Load Sharing and Unstable Mechanism Concepts
[9]  
Goel V.K., Kim Y.E., Lim T.H., Weinstein J.N., An analytical investigation of the mechanics of spinal instrumentation, Spine, 13, pp. 1003-1011, (1988)
[10]  
Gurr K.R., Mc Afee P.C., Shih C.M., Biomechanical analysis of anterior and posterior instrumentation systems following corpectomy. A calf spine model, J Bone Joint Surg, 70A, pp. 1182-1191, (1988)