Effects of neck movements on stability and subsidence in cervical interbody fusion: an in vitro study

2001 ◽  
Vol 94 (1) ◽  
pp. 97-107 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annette Kettler ◽  
Hans-Joachim Wilke ◽  
Lutz Claes

Object. The aim of this in vitro study was to determine the influence of simulated postoperative neck movements on the stabilizing effect and subsidence of four different anterior cervical interbody fusion devices. Emphasis was placed on the relation between subsidence and spinal stability. Methods. The flexibility of 24 human cervical spine specimens was tested before and directly after being stabilized with a WING, BAK/C, AcroMed I/F cage, or with bone cement in standard flexibility tests under 50 N axial preload. Thereafter, 700 pure moment loading cycles (± 2 Nm) were applied in randomized directions to simulate physiological neck movements. Additional flexibility tests in combination with measurements of the subsidence depth were conducted after 50, 100, 200, 300, 500, and 700 loading cycles. In all four groups, simulated postoperative neck movements caused an increase of the range of motion (ROM) ranging from 0.4 to 3.1° and of the neutral zone from 0.1 to 4.2°. This increase in flexibility was most distinct in extension followed by flexion, lateral bending, and axial rotation. After cyclic loading, ROM tended to be lower in the group fitted with AcroMed cages (3.3° in right lateral bending, 3.5° in left axial rotation, 7.8° in flexion, 8.3° in extension) and in the group in which bone cement was applied (5.4°, 2.5°, 7.4°, and 8.8°, respectively) than in those fixed with the WING (6.3°, 5.4°, 9.7°, and 6.9°, respectively) and BAK cages (6.2°, 4.5°, 10.2°, and 11.6°, respectively). Conclusions. Simulated repeated neck movements not only caused an increase of the flexibility but also subsidence of the implants into the adjacent vertebrae. The relation between flexibility increase and subsidence seemed to depend on the implant design: subsiding BAK/C cages partially supported stability whereas subsiding WING cages and AcroMed cages did not.

2000 ◽  
Vol 92 (1) ◽  
pp. 87-92 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annette Kettler ◽  
Hans-Joachim Wilke ◽  
Rupert Dietl ◽  
Matthias Krammer ◽  
Christianto Lumenta ◽  
...  

Object. The function of interbody fusion cages is to stabilize spinal segments primarily by distracting them as well as by allowing bone ingrowth and fusion. An important condition for efficient formation of bone tissue is achieving adequate spinal stability. However, the initial stability may be reduced due to repeated movements of the spine during everyday activity. Therefore, in addition to immediate stability, stability after cyclic loading is of remarkable relevance; however, this has not yet been investigated. The object of this study was to investigate the immediate stabilizing effect of three different posterior lumbar interbody fusion cages and to clarify the effect of cyclic loading on the stabilization. Methods. Before and directly after implantation of a Zientek, Stryker, or Ray posterior lumbar interbody fusion cage, 24 lumbar spine segment specimens were each evaluated in a spine tester. Pure lateral bending, flexion—extension, and axial rotation moments (± 7.5 Nm) were applied continuously. The motion in each specimen was measured simultaneously. The specimens were then loaded cyclically (40,000 cycles, 5 Hz) with an axial compression force ranging from 200 to 1000 N. Finally, they were tested once again in the spine tester. Conclusions. In general, a decrease of movement in all loading directions was noted after insertion of the Zientek and Ray cages and an increase of movement after implantation of a Stryker cage. In all three cage groups greater stability was demonstrated in lateral bending and flexion than in extension and axial rotation. Reduced stability during cyclic loading was observed in all three cage groups; however, loss of stability was most pronounced when the Ray cage was used.


2005 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 339-343 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick W. Hitchon ◽  
Kurt Eichholz ◽  
Christopher Barry ◽  
Paige Rubenbauer ◽  
Aditya Ingalhalikar ◽  
...  

Object. The authors compared the biomechanical performance of the human cadaveric spine implanted with a metallic ball-and-cup artificial disc at L4–5 with the spine's intact state and after anterior discectomy. Methods. Seven human L2—S1 cadaveric spines were mounted on a biomechanical testing frame. Pure moments of 0, 1.5, 3.0, 4.5, and 6.0 Nm were applied to the spine at L-2 in six degrees of motion (flexion, extension, right and left lateral bending, and right and left axial rotation). The spines were tested in the intact state as well as after anterior L4–5 discectomy. The Maverick disc was implanted in the discectomy defect, and load testing was repeated. The artificial disc created greater rigidity for the spine than was present after discectomy, and the spine performed biomechanically in a manner comparable with the intact state. Conclusions. The results indicate that in an in vitro setting, this model of artificial disc stabilizes the spine after discectomy, restoring motion comparable with that of the intact state.


2002 ◽  
Vol 97 (4) ◽  
pp. 447-455 ◽  
Author(s):  
Denis J. DiAngelo ◽  
Jeffrey L. Scifert ◽  
Scott Kitchel ◽  
G. Bryan Cornwall ◽  
Bobby J. McVay

Object. An in vitro biomechanical study was conducted to determine the effects of anterior stabilization on cage-assisted lumbar interbody fusion biomechanics in a multilevel human cadaveric lumbar spine model. Methods. Three spine conditions were compared: harvested, bilateral multilevel cages (CAGES), and CAGES with bioabsorbable anterior plates (CBAP), tested under flexion—extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation. Measurements included vertebral motion, applied load, and bending/rotational moments. Application of anterior fixation decreased local motion and increased stiffness of the instrumented levels. Clinically, this spinal stability may serve to promote fusion. Conclusions. Coupled with the bioabsorbability of the plating material, the bioabsorbable anterior lumbar plating system is considered biomechanically advantageous.


1993 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 867
Author(s):  
Joo Chul Ihn ◽  
Poong Taek Kim ◽  
Il Hyung Park ◽  
Chang Pyo Bae

Neurosurgery ◽  
2001 ◽  
Vol 49 (6) ◽  
pp. 1399-1408 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrzej Maciejczak ◽  
Michał Ciach ◽  
Maciej Radek ◽  
Andrzej Radek ◽  
Jan Awrejcewicz

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.


1999 ◽  
Vol 90 (1) ◽  
pp. 91-98 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Giancarlo Vishteh ◽  
Neil R. Crawford ◽  
M. Stephen Melton ◽  
Robert F. Spetzler ◽  
Volker K. H. Sonntag ◽  
...  

Object. The authors sought to determine the biomechanics of the occipitoatlantal (occiput [Oc]—C1) and atlantoaxial (C1–2) motion segments after unilateral gradient condylectomy. Methods. Six human cadaveric specimens (skull with attached upper cervical spine) underwent nondestructive biomechanical testing (physiological loads) during flexion—extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation. Axial translation from tension to compression was also studied across Oc—C2. Each specimen served as its own control and underwent baseline testing in the intact state. The specimens were then tested after progressive unilateral condylectomy (25% resection until completion), which was performed using frameless stereotactic guidance. At Oc—C1 for all motions that were tested, mobility increased significantly compared to baseline after a 50% condylectomy. Flexion—extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation increased 15.3%, 40.8%, and 28.1%, respectively. At C1–2, hypermobility during flexion—extension occurred after a 25% condylectomy, during axial rotation after 75% condylectomy, and during lateral bending after a 100% condylectomy. Conclusions. Resection of 50% or more of the occipital condyle produces statistically significant hypermobility at Oc—C1. After a 75% resection, the biomechanics of the Oc—C1 and C1–2 motion segments change considerably. Performing fusion of the craniovertebral junction should therefore be considered if half or more of one occipital condyle is resected.


2003 ◽  
Vol 98 (2) ◽  
pp. 202-209 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Fernando Gonzalez ◽  
Neil R. Crawford ◽  
Robert H. Chamberlain ◽  
Luis E. Perez Garza ◽  
Mark C. Preul ◽  
...  

Object. The authors compared the biomechanical stability resulting from the use of a new technique for occipitoatlantal motion segment fixation with an established method and assessed the additional stability provided by combining the two techniques. Methods. Specimens were loaded using nonconstraining pure moments while recording the three-dimensional angular movement at occiput (Oc)—C1 and C1–2. Specimens were tested intact and after destabilization and fixation as follows: 1) Oc—C1 transarticular screws plus C1–2 transarticular screws; 2) occipitocervical transarticular (OCTA) plate in which C1–2 transarticular screws attach to a loop from Oc to C-2; and (3) OCTA plate plus Oc—C1 transarticular screws. Occipitoatlantal transarticular screws reduced motion to well within the normal range. The OCTA loop and transarticular screws allowed a very small neutral zone, elastic zone, and range of motion during lateral bending and axial rotation. The transarticular screws, however, were less effective than the OCTA loop in resisting flexion and extension. Conclusions. Biomechanically, Oc—C1 transarticular screws performed well enough to be considered as an alternative for Oc—C1 fixation, especially when instability at C1–2 is minimal. Techniques for augmenting these screws posteriorly by using a wired bone graft buttress, as is currently undertaken with C1–2 transarticular screws, may be needed for optimal performance.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document