scholarly journals Single-Level In Vitro Kinematic Comparison of Novel Inline Cervical Interbody Devices With Intervertebral Screw, Anchor, or Blade

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (7) ◽  
pp. 697-707 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul M. Arnold ◽  
Ivan Cheng ◽  
Jonathan A. Harris ◽  
Mir M. Hussain ◽  
Chengmin Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Axial Rotation ◽  
Biomechanical Study ◽  
Posterior Fixation ◽  
Lateral Mass ◽  
Flexion Extension ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Fixation Techniques ◽  
Lateral Mass Screws ◽  
Loading Modes

Study Design: In vitro cadaveric biomechanical study. Objective: To compare the biomechanics of integrated anchor and blade versus traditional screw fixation techniques for interbody fusion. Methods: Fifteen cadaveric cervical spines were divided into 3 equal groups (n = 5). Each spine was tested: intact, after discectomy (simulating an injury model), interbody spacer alone (S), integrated interbody spacer (iSA), and integrated spacer with lateral mass screw and rod fixation (LMS+iS). Each treatment group included integrated spacers with either screw, anchor, or blade integrated spacers. Constructs were tested in flexion-extension (FE), lateral bending (LB), and axial rotation (AR) under pure moments (±1.5 N m). Results: Across all 3 planes, the following range of motion trend was observed: Injured > Intact > S > iSA > LMS+iS. In FE and LB, integrated anchor and blade significantly decreased motion compared with intact and injured conditions, before and after supplemental posterior fixation ( P < .05). Comparing tested devices revealed biomechanical equivalence between screw, anchor, and blade fixation methods in all loading modes ( P > .05). Conclusion: All integrated interbody devices reduced intact and injured motion; lateral mass screws and rods further stabilized the single motion segment. Comparing screw, anchor, or bladed integrated anterior cervical discectomy and fusion spacers revealed no significant differences.

Evaluating stability of the craniovertebral junction after unilateral C1 lateral mass resection: implications for the direct lateral approach

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Pranay Soni ◽  
Jeremy G. Loss ◽  
Callan M. Gillespie ◽  
Robb W. Colbrunn ◽  
Richard Schlenk ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Axial Rotation ◽  
Craniovertebral Junction ◽  
Craniocervical Junction ◽  
Lateral Approach ◽  
Biomechanical Study ◽  
Lateral Mass ◽  
Internal Stabilization ◽  
Flexion Extension ◽  
Direct Lateral Approach

OBJECTIVE The direct lateral approach is an alternative to the transoral or endonasal approaches to ventral epidural lesions at the lower craniocervical junction. In this study, the authors performed, to their knowledge, the first in vitro biomechanical evaluation of the craniovertebral junction after sequential unilateral C1 lateral mass resection. The authors hypothesized that partial resection of the lateral mass would not result in a significant increase in range of motion (ROM) and may not require internal stabilization. METHODS The authors performed multidirectional in vitro ROM testing using a robotic spine testing system on 8 fresh cadaveric specimens. We evaluated ROM in 3 primary movements (axial rotation [AR], flexion/extension [FE], and lateral bending [LB]) and 4 coupled movements (AR+E, AR+F, LB + left AR, and LB + right AR). Testing was performed in the intact state, after C1 hemilaminectomy, and after sequential 25%, 50%, 75%, and 100% C1 lateral mass resection. RESULTS There were no significant increases in occipital bone (Oc)–C1, C1–2, or Oc–C2 ROM after C1 hemilaminectomy and 25% lateral mass resection. After 50% resection, Oc–C1 AR ROM increased by 54.4% (p = 0.002), Oc LB ROM increased by 47.8% (p = 0.010), and Oc–C1 AR+E ROM increased by 65.8% (p < 0.001). Oc–C2 FE ROM increased by 7.2% (p = 0.016) after 50% resection; 75% and 100% lateral mass resection resulted in further increases in ROM. CONCLUSIONS In this cadaveric biomechanical study, the authors found that unilateral C1 hemilaminectomy and 25% resection of the C1 lateral mass did not result in significant biomechanical instability at the occipitocervical junction, and 50% resection led to significant increases in Oc–C2 ROM. This is the first biomechanical study of lateral mass resection, and future studies can serve to validate these findings.

Biomechanical comparison of occipitoatlantal screw fixation techniques

2008 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 143-152 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas C. Bambakidis ◽  
Iman Feiz-Erfan ◽  
Eric M. Horn ◽  
L. Fernando Gonzalez ◽  
Seungwon Baek ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Screw Fixation ◽  
Axial Rotation ◽  
Segmental Motion ◽  
Lateral Mass ◽  
Lateral Bending ◽  
Flexion Extension ◽  
Improved Stability ◽  
Fixation Techniques ◽  
Structural Graft ◽  
Lateral Mass Screws

Object The stability provided by 3 occipitoatlantal fixation techniques (occiput [Oc]–C1 transarticular screws, occipital keel screws rigidly interconnected with C-1 lateral mass screws, and suboccipital/sublaminar wired contoured rod) were compared. Methods Seven human cadaveric specimens received transarticular screws and 7 received occipital keel–C1 lateral mass screws. All specimens later underwent contoured rod fixation. All conditions were studied with and without placement of a structural graft wired between the skull base and C-1 lamina. Specimens were loaded quasistatically using pure moments to induce flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation while recording segmental motion optoelectronically. Flexibility was measured immediately postoperatively and after 10,000 cycles of fatigue. Results Application of Oc–C1 transarticular screws, with a wired graft, reduced the mean range of motion (ROM) to 3% of normal. Occipital keel–C1 lateral mass screws (also with graft) offered less stability than transarticular screws during extension and lateral bending (p < 0.02), reducing ROM to 17% of normal. The wired contoured rod reduced motion to 31% of normal, providing significantly less stability than either screw fixation technique. Fatigue increased motion in constructs fitted with transarticular screws, keel screws/lateral mass screw constructs, and contoured wired rods, by means of 19, 5, and 26%, respectively. In all constructs, adding a structural graft significantly improved stability, but the extent depended on the loading direction. Conclusions Assuming the presence of mild C1–2 instability, Oc–C1 transarticular screws and occipital keel–C1 lateral mass screws are approximately equivalent in performance for occipitoatlantal stabilization in promoting fusion. A posteriorly wired contoured rod is less likely to provide a good fusion environment because of less stabilizing potential and a greater likelihood of loosening with fatigue.

New anterior controllable antedisplacement and fusion surgery for cervical ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament: a biomechanical study

2022 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Keyword(s):  
Fatigue Loading ◽  
Axial Rotation ◽  
Posterior Longitudinal Ligament ◽  
Cyclic Fatigue ◽  
Biomechanical Study ◽  
Biomechanical Stability ◽  
Loading Test ◽  
Crossover Effect ◽  
Flexion Extension

OBJECTIVE The traditional anterior approach for multilevel severe cervical ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL) is demanding and risky. Recently, a novel surgical procedure—anterior controllable antedisplacement and fusion (ACAF)—was introduced by the authors to deal with these problems and achieve better clinical outcomes. However, to the authors’ knowledge, the immediate and long-term biomechanical stability obtained after this procedure has never been evaluated. Therefore, the authors compared the postoperative biomechanical stability of ACAF with those of more traditional approaches: anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF). METHODS To determine and assess pre- and postsurgical range of motion (ROM) (2 Nm torque) in flexion-extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation in the cervical spine, the authors collected cervical areas (C1–T1) from 18 cadaveric spines. The cyclic fatigue loading test was set up with a 3-Nm cycled load (2 Hz, 3000 cycles). All samples used in this study were randomly divided into three groups according to surgical procedures: ACDF, ACAF, and ACCF. The spines were tested under the following conditions: 1) intact state flexibility test; 2) postoperative model (ACDF, ACAF, ACCF) flexibility test; 3) cyclic loading (n = 3000); and 4) fatigue model flexibility test. RESULTS After operations were performed on the cadaveric spines, the segmental and total postoperative ROM values in all directions showed significant reductions for all groups. Then, the ROMs tended to increase during the fatigue test. No significant crossover effect was detected between evaluation time and operation method. Therefore, segmental and total ROM change trends were parallel among the three groups. However, the postoperative and fatigue ROMs in the ACCF group tended to be larger in all directions. No significant differences between these ROMs were detected in the ACDF and ACAF groups. CONCLUSIONS This in vitro biomechanical study demonstrated that the biomechanical stability levels for ACAF and ACDF were similar and were both significantly greater than that of ACCF. The clinical superiority of ACAF combined with our current results showed that this procedure is likely to be an acceptable alternative method for multilevel cervical OPLL treatment.

scholarly journals Biomechanical Evaluation of Unilateral Versus Bilateral C1 Lateral Mass-C2 Intralaminar Fixation

2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 239-245 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nitin Bhatia ◽  
Asheen Rama ◽  
Brandon Sievers ◽  
Ryan Quigley ◽  
Michelle H. McGarry ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Axial Rotation ◽  
Biomechanical Properties ◽  
Lateral Mass ◽  
Intact State ◽  
Flexion Extension ◽  
Fixation Techniques ◽  
Rotation Stiffness ◽  
Biomechanical Evaluation ◽  
C2 Fixation

Study Design: Biomechanical, cadaveric study. Objectives: To compare the relative stiffness of unilateral C1 lateral mass-C2 intralaminar fixation to intact specimens and bilateral C1 lateral mass-C2 intralaminar constructs. Methods: The biomechanical integrity of a unilateral C1 lateral mass-C2 intralaminar screw construct was compared to intact specimens and bilateral C1 lateral mass-C2 intralaminar screw constructs. Five human cadaveric specimens were used. Range of motion and stiffness were tested to determine the stiffness of the constructs. Results: Unilateral fixation significantly decreased flexion/extension range of motion compared to intact ( P < .001) but did not significantly affect axial rotation ( P = .3) or bending range of motion ( P = .3). There was a significant decrease in stiffness in extension for both unilateral and bilateral fixation techniques compared to intact ( P = .04 and P = .03, respectively). There was also a significant decrease in stiffness for ipsilateral rotation for the unilateral construct compared to intact ( P = .007) whereas the bilateral construct significantly increased ipsilateral rotation stiffness compared to both intact and unilateral fixation ( P < .001). Conclusion: Bilateral constructs did show improved biomechanical properties compared to the unilateral constructs. However, unilateral C1-C2 fixation using a C1 lateral mass and C2 intralaminar screw-rod construct decreased range of motion and improved stiffness compared to the intact state with the exception of extension and ipsilateral rotation. Hence, a unilateral construct may be acceptable in clinical situations in which bilateral fixation is not possible, but an external orthosis may be necessary to achieve a fusion.

Immediate Stiffness of the C5–C6 Segment after Discectomy with the Cloward Technique: An in Vitro Biomechanical Study on a Human Cadaveric Model

Neurosurgery ◽  
2001 ◽  
Vol 49 (6) ◽  
pp. 1399-1408 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrzej Maciejczak ◽  
Michał Ciach ◽  
Maciej Radek ◽  
Andrzej Radek ◽  
Jan Awrejcewicz
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Spinal Instrumentation ◽  
Axial Rotation ◽  
Postoperative Management ◽  
Biomechanical Study ◽  
Lateral Bending ◽  
Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Cloward Procedure ◽  
Flexion Extension

ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE To determine whether the Cloward technique of cervical discectomy and fusion increases immediate postoperative stiffness of single cervical motion segment after application of interbody dowel bone graft. METHODS We measured and compared the stiffness of single-motion segments in cadaveric cervical spines before and immediately after interbody fusion with the Cloward technique. Changes in range of motion and stiffness of the C5–C6 segment were measured in a bending flexibility test (flexion, extension, lateral bending and axial rotation) before and after a Cloward procedure in 11 fresh-frozen human cadaveric specimens from the 4th through the 7th vertebrae. RESULTS The Cloward procedure produced a statistically significant increase in stiffness of the operated segment in flexion and lateral bending when compared with the intact spine. The less stiff the segment before the operation, the greater the increase in its postoperative flexural stiffness (statistically significant). The Cloward procedure produced nonuniform changes in rotational and extensional stiffness that increased in some specimens and decreased in others. CONCLUSION Our data demonstrate that Cloward interbody fusion increases immediate postoperative stiffness of an operated segment only in flexion and lateral bending in cadaveric specimens in an in vitro environment. Thus, Cloward fusion seems a relatively ineffective method for increasing the stiffness of a construct. This may add to discussion on the use of spinal instrumentation and postoperative management of patients after cervical discectomy, which varies from bracing in hard collars through immobilization in soft collars to no external orthosis.

scholarly journals A Biomechanical Evaluation of a Next-Generation Integrated and Modular ACDF Device Possessing Full-Plate, Half-Plate, and No-Profile Fixation Iterations

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. 826-833
Author(s):  
Ripul Panchal ◽  
Anup Gandhi ◽  
Chris Ferry ◽  
Sam Farmer ◽  
Jeremy Hansmann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Plate Fixation ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Axial Rotation ◽  
Biomechanical Study ◽  
The Novel ◽  
Novel Device ◽  
Plate Group ◽  
Flexion Extension ◽  
Group 2

Study Design: In vitro biomechanical study. Objectives: The objective of this in vitro biomechanical range-of-motion (ROM) study was to evaluate spinal segmental stability following fixation with a novel anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) device (“novel device”) that possesses integrated and modular no-profile, half-plate, and full-plate fixation capabilities. Methods: Human cadaveric (n = 18, C3-T1) specimens were divided into 3 groups (n = 6/group). Each group would receive one novel device iteration. Specimen terminal ends were potted. Each specimen was first tested in an intact state, followed by anterior discectomy (C5/C6) and iterative instrumentation. Testing order: (1) novel device (group 1, no-profile; group 2, half-plate; group 3, full-plate); (2) novel device (all groups) with lateral mass screws (LMS); (3) traditional ACDF plate + cage; (4) traditional ACDF plate + cage + LMS. A 2 N·m moment was applied in flexion/extension (FE), lateral bending (LB), and axial rotation (AR) via a kinematic testing machine. Segmental ROM was tracked and normalized to intact conditions. Comparative statistical analyses were performed. Results: Key findings: (1) the novel half- and full-plate constructs provided comparable reduction in FE and LB ROM to that of traditional plated ACDF ( P ≥ .05); (2) the novel full-plate construct significantly exceeded all other anterior-only constructs ( P ≤ .05) in AR ROM reduction; and (3) the novel half-plate construct significantly exceeded the no-profile construct in FE ( P < .05). Conclusions: The novel ACDF device may be a versatile alternative to traditional no-profile and independent plating techniques, as it provides comparable ROM reduction in all principle motion directions, across all device iterations.

Biomechanics of a Novel Minimally Invasive Lumbar Interspinous Spacer: Effects on Kinematics, Facet Loads, and Foramen Height

2010 ◽  
Vol 66 (suppl_1) ◽  
pp. ons-126-ons-133 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruno C.R. Lazaro ◽  
Leonardo B.C. Brasiliense ◽  
Anna G.U. Sawa ◽  
Phillip M. Reyes ◽  
Nicholas Theodore ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Axial Rotation ◽  
Surface Strain ◽  
Interspinous Spacer ◽  
Instantaneous Axis Of Rotation ◽  
Flexion Extension ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Biomechanical Effect ◽  
Foraminal Height

Abstract Objective: To study the alteration to normal biomechanics after insertion of a lumbar interspinous spacer (ISS) in vitro by nondestructive cadaveric flexibility testing. Methods: Seven human cadaveric specimens were studied before and after ISS placement at L1–L2. Angular range of motion, lax zone, stiff zone, sagittal instantaneous axis of rotation (IAR), foraminal height, and facet loads were compared between conditions. Flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation were induced using pure moments (7.5 Nm maximum) while recording motion optoelectronically. The IAR was measured during loading with a 400 N compressive follower. Foraminal height changes were calculated using rigid body methods. Facet loads were assessed from surface strain and neural network analysis. Results: After ISS insertion, range of motion and stiff zone during extension were significantly reduced (P &lt; .01). Foraminal height was significantly reduced from flexion to extension in both normal and ISS-implanted conditions; there was significantly less reduction in foraminal height during extension with the ISS in place. The ISS reduced the mean facet load by 30% during flexion (P &lt; .02) and 69% during extension (P &lt; .015). The IAR after ISS implantation was less than 1 mm from the normal position (P &gt; .18). Conclusion: The primary biomechanical effect of the ISS was reduced extension with associated reduced facet loads and smaller decrease in foraminal height. The ISS had little effect on sagittal IAR or on motion or facet loads in other directions.

scholarly journals Biomechanical Comparison of Posterior Fixation Combinations with an Allograft Spacer between the Lateral Mass and Pedicle Screws

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (20) ◽  
pp. 7291
Author(s):  
Soo-Bin Lee ◽  
Hwan-Mo Lee ◽  
Tae-Hyun Park ◽  
Sung Lee ◽  
Young-Woo Kwon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pedicle Screws ◽  
Element Model ◽  
Axial Rotation ◽  
Posterior Fixation ◽  
Hybrid Technique ◽  
Lateral Mass ◽  
Lateral Bending ◽  
Flexion Extension ◽  
Hybrid Motion ◽  
Biomechanical Comparison

Background: There are a few biomechanical studies that describe posterior fixation methods with pedicle screws (PS) and lateral mass screws (LMS); the combination of both screw types and their effect on an allograft spacer in a surgically treated cervical segment is unknown. Methods: Finite element model (FEM) analyses were used to investigate the effects of a hybrid technique using posterior PS and LMS. Stress distribution and subsidence risk from a combination of screws under hybrid motion control conditions, including flexion, extension, axial rotation, and lateral bending, were investigated to evaluate the biomechanical characteristics of different six-screw combinations. Findings: The load sharing on the allograft spacer in flexion mode was highest in the LMS model (74.6%) and lowest in the PS model (35.1%). The likelihood of subsidence of allograft spacer on C6 was highest in the screws from the distal LMS (type 5) model during flexion and extension (4.902 MPa, 30.1% and 2.189 MPa, 13.4%). In lateral bending, the left unilateral LMS (type 4) model screws on C5 (3.726 MPa, 22.9%) and C6 (2.994 MPa, 18.4%) yielded the greatest subsidence risks, because the lateral bending forces were supported by the LMS. In counterclockwise axial rotation, the left unilateral LMS (type 4) model screws on C5 (3.092 MPa, 19.0%) and C6 (3.076 MPa, 18.9%) demonstrated the highest subsidence risks. Conclusion: The asymmetrical ipsilateral use of LMS and posterior PS in lateral bending and axial rotation demonstrated the lowest stability and greatest subsidence risk. We recommend bilateral symmetrical insertion of LMS or posterior PS and posterior PS on distal vertebrae for increased stability and reduced risk of allograft spacer subsidence.

Biomechanical analysis of stand-alone lumbar interbody cages versus 360° constructs: an in vitro and finite element investigation

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Posterior Instrumentation ◽  
Axial Rotation ◽  
Posterior Fixation ◽  
Interbody Cage ◽  
Lateral Bending ◽  
Flexion Extension ◽  
Lateral Interbody ◽  
Flexion And Extension

OBJECTIVE Low fusion rates and cage subsidence are limitations of lumbar fixation with stand-alone interbody cages. Various approaches to interbody cage placement exist, yet the need for supplemental posterior fixation is not clear from clinical studies. Therefore, as prospective clinical studies are lacking, a comparison of segmental kinematics, cage properties, and load sharing on vertebral endplates is needed. This laboratory investigation evaluates the mechanical stability and biomechanical properties of various interbody fixation techniques by performing cadaveric and finite element (FE) modeling studies. METHODS An in vitro experiment using 7 fresh-frozen human cadavers was designed to test intact spines with 1) stand-alone lateral interbody cage constructs (lateral interbody fusion, LIF) and 2) LIF supplemented with posterior pedicle screw-rod fixation (360° constructs). FE and kinematic data were used to validate a ligamentous FE model of the lumbopelvic spine. The validated model was then used to evaluate the stability of stand-alone LIF, transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), and anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) cages with and without supplemental posterior fixation at the L4–5 level. The FE models of intact and instrumented cases were subjected to a 400-N compressive preload followed by an 8-Nm bending moment to simulate physiological flexion, extension, bending, and axial rotation. Segmental kinematics and load sharing at the inferior endplate were compared. RESULTS The FE kinematic predictions were consistent with cadaveric data. The range of motion (ROM) in LIF was significantly lower than intact spines for both stand-alone and 360° constructs. The calculated reduction in motion with respect to intact spines for stand-alone constructs ranged from 43% to 66% for TLIF, 67%–82% for LIF, and 69%–86% for ALIF in flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation. In flexion and extension, the maximum reduction in motion was 70% for ALIF versus 81% in LIF for stand-alone cases. When supplemented with posterior fixation, the corresponding reduction in ROM was 76%–87% for TLIF, 86%–91% for LIF, and 90%–92% for ALIF. The addition of posterior instrumentation resulted in a significant reduction in peak stress at the superior endplate of the inferior segment in all scenarios. CONCLUSIONS Stand-alone ALIF and LIF cages are most effective in providing stability in lateral bending and axial rotation and less so in flexion and extension. Supplemental posterior instrumentation improves stability for all interbody techniques. Comparative clinical data are needed to further define the indications for stand-alone cages in lumbar fusion surgery.

In vitro biomechanics of cervical disc arthroplasty with the ProDisc-C total disc implant

2004 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 44-54 ◽  
Author(s):  
Denis J. DiAngelo ◽  
Kevin T. Foley ◽  
Brian R. Morrow ◽  
John S. Schwab ◽  
Jung Song ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Axial Rotation ◽  
Biomechanical Study ◽  
Cervical Disc ◽  
Cervical Disc Arthroplasty ◽  
Disc Arthroplasty ◽  
Single Level ◽  
Flexion Extension ◽  
Adjacent Segments ◽  
Treated Site

An in vitro biomechanical study was conducted to compare the effects of disc arthroplasty and anterior cervical fusion on cervical spine biomechanics in a multilevel human cadaveric model. Three spine conditions were studied: harvested, single-level cervical disc arthroplasty, and single-level fusion. A programmable testing apparatus was used that replicated physiological flexion/extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation. Measurements included vertebral motion, applied load, and bending moments. Relative rotations at the superior, treated, and inferior motion segment units (MSUs) were normalized with respect to the overall rotation of those three MSUs and compared using a one-way analysis of variance with Student–Newman–Keuls test (p < 0.05). Simulated fusion decreased motion across the treated site relative to the harvested and disc arthroplasty conditions. The reduced motion at the treated site was compensated at the adjacent segments by an increase in motion. For all modes of testing, use of an artificial disc prosthesis did not alter the motion patterns at either the instrumented level or adjacent segments compared with the harvested condition, except in extension.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document