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.

Restabilization of the Occipitocervical Junction After a Complete Unilateral Condylectomy: A Biomechanical Comparison of Unilateral and Bilateral Fixation Techniques

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 157-164 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ilyas M Eli ◽  
Michael Karsy ◽  
Darrel S Brodke ◽  
Kent N Bachus ◽  
William T Couldwell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Biomechanical Testing ◽  
Axial Rotation ◽  
Neurological Injury ◽  
Occipital Condyle ◽  
Posterior Fixation ◽  
Lateral Bending ◽  
Flexion Extension ◽  
Fixation Techniques ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Biomechanical Comparison

Abstract BACKGROUND Occipitocervical instability may result from transcondylar resection of the occipital condyle. Initially, patients may be able to maintain a neutral alignment but severe occipitoatlantal subluxation may subsequently occur, with cranial settling, spinal cord kinking, and neurological injury. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the ability of posterior fixation constructs to prevent progression to severe deformity after radical unilateral condylectomy. METHODS Eight human cadaveric specimens (Oc-C2) underwent biomechanical testing to compare stiffness under physiological loads (1.5 N m). A complete unilateral condylectomy was performed to destabilize one Oc-C1 joint, and the contralateral joint was left intact. Unilateral Oc-C1 or Oc-C2 constructs on the resected side and bilateral Oc-C1 or Oc-C2 constructs were tested. RESULTS The bilateral Oc-C2 construct provided the greatest stiffness, but the difference was only statistically significant in certain planes of motion. The unilateral constructs had similar stiffness in lateral bending, but the unilateral Oc-C1 construct was less stiff in axial rotation and flexion-extension than the unilateral Oc-C2 construct. The bilateral Oc-C2 construct was stiffer than the unilateral Oc-C2 construct in axial rotation and lateral bending, but there was no difference between these constructs in flexion-extension. CONCLUSION Patients who undergo a complete unilateral condylectomy require close surveillance for occipitocervical instability. A bilateral Oc-C2 construct provides suitable biomechanical strength, which is superior to other constructs. A unilateral construct decreases abnormal motion but lacks the stiffness of a bilateral construct. However, given that most patients undergo a partial condylectomy and only a small proportion of patients develop instability, there may be scenarios in which a unilateral construct may be appropriate, such as for temporary internal stabilization.

Biomechanical comparison between C-7 lateral mass and pedicle screws in subaxial cervical constructs

2010 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 688-694 ◽  
Author(s):  
Risheng Xu ◽  
Matthew J. McGirt ◽  
Edward G. Sutter ◽  
Daniel M. Sciubba ◽  
Jean-Paul Wolinsky ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rotational Motion ◽  
Pedicle Screws ◽  
Materials Testing ◽  
Rigid Fixation ◽  
Lateral Mass ◽  
Lateral Bending ◽  
Flexion Extension ◽  
Cyclical Loading ◽  
Lateral Mass Screws ◽  
Biomechanical Comparison

Object The aim of this study was to conduct the first in vitro biomechanical comparison of immediate and postcyclical rigidities of C-7 lateral mass versus C-7 pedicle screws in posterior C4–7 constructs. Methods Ten human cadaveric spines were treated with C4–6 lateral mass screw and C-7 lateral mass (5 specimens) versus pedicle (5 specimens) screw fixation. Spines were potted in polymethylmethacrylate bone cement and placed on a materials testing machine. Rotation about the axis of bending was measured using passive retroreflective markers and infrared motion capture cameras. The motion of C-4 relative to C-7 in flexion-extension and lateral bending was assessed uninstrumented, immediately after instrumentation, and following 40,000 cycles of 4 Nm of flexion-extension and lateral bending moments at 1 Hz. The effect of instrumentation and cyclical loading on rotational motion across C4–7 was analyzed for significance. Results Preinstrumented spines for the 2 cohorts were comparable in bone mineral density and range of motion in both flexion-extension (p = 0.33) and lateral bending (p = 0.16). Lateral mass and pedicle screw constructs significantly reduced motion during flexion-extension (11.3°–0.26° for lateral mass screws, p = 0.002; 10.51°–0.30° for pedicle screws, p = 0.008) and lateral bending (7.38°–0.27° for lateral mass screws, p = 0.003; 11.65°–0.49° for pedicle screws, p = 0.03). After cyclical loading in both cohorts, rotational motion over C4–7 was increased during flexion-extension (0.26°–0.68° for lateral mass screws; 0.30°–1.31° for pedicle screws) and lateral bending (0.27°–0.39° and 0.49°–0.80°, respectively), although the increase was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). There was no statistical difference in postcyclical flexion-extension (p = 0.20) and lateral bending (0.10) between lateral mass and pedicle screws. Conclusions Both C-7 lateral mass and C-7 pedicle screws allow equally rigid fixation of subaxial lateral mass constructs ending at C-7. Immediately and within a simulated 6-week postfixation period, C-7 lateral mass screws may be as effective as C-7 pedicle screws in biomechanically stabilizing long subaxial lateral mass constructs.

How the height and the area of the annulus fibrosus affect the range of motion behavior: A stochastic analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 233 (10) ◽  
pp. 1985-1992
Author(s):  
Héctor E Jaramillo S
Keyword(s):  
Finite Element ◽  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Annulus Fibrosus ◽  
Element Model ◽  
Axial Rotation ◽  
Disc Height ◽  
Lateral Bending ◽  
Analytic Equation ◽  
Geometrical Properties ◽  
Flexion Extension

The annulus fibrosus has substantial variations in its geometrical properties (among individuals and between levels), and plays an important role in the biomechanics of the spine. Few works have studied the influence of the geometrical properties including annulus area, anterior / posterior disc height, and over the range of motion, but in general these properties have not been reported in the finite element models. This paper presents a probabilistic finite element analyses (Abaqus 6.14.2) intended to assess the effects of the average disc height ( hp) and the area ( A) of the annulus fibrosus on the biomechanics of the lumbar spine. The annulus model was loaded under flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation and analyzed for different combinations of hpand A in order to obtain their effects over the range of motion. A set of 50 combinations of hp(mean = 18.1 mm, SD = 3.5 mm) and A (mean = 49.8%, SD = 4.6%) were determined randomly according to a normal distribution. A Yeoh energy function was used for the matrix and an exponential function for the fibers. The range of motion was more sensitive to hpthan to A. With regard to the range of motion the segment was more sensitive in the following order: flexion, axial rotation, extension, and lateral bending. An increase of the hpproduces an increase of the range of motion, but this decreases when A increases. Comparing the range of motion with the experimental data, on average, 56.0% and 73.0% of the total of data were within the experimental range for the L4–L5 and L5–S1 segments, respectively. Further, an analytic equation was derived to obtain the range of motion as a function of the hpand A. This equation can be used to calibrate a finite element model of the spine segment, and also to understand the influence of each geometrical parameter on the range of motion.

Hybrid dynamic stabilization: a biomechanical assessment of adjacent and supraadjacent levels of the lumbar spine

2012 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 232-242 ◽  
Author(s):  
Prasath Mageswaran ◽  
Fernando Techy ◽  
Robb W. Colbrunn ◽  
Tara F. Bonner ◽  
Robert F. McLain
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Lumbar Fusion ◽  
Industrial Robot ◽  
Pedicle Screws ◽  
Axial Rotation ◽  
Dynamic Stabilization ◽  
Follower Load ◽  
Lateral Bending ◽  
Intact Specimen ◽  
Flexion Extension

Object The object of this study was to evaluate the effect of hybrid dynamic stabilization on adjacent levels of the lumbar spine. Methods Seven human spine specimens from T-12 to the sacrum were used. The following conditions were implemented: 1) intact spine; 2) fusion of L4–5 with bilateral pedicle screws and titanium rods; and 3) supplementation of the L4–5 fusion with pedicle screw dynamic stabilization constructs at L3–4, with the purpose of protecting the L3–4 level from excessive range of motion (ROM) and to create a smoother motion transition to the rest of the lumbar spine. An industrial robot was used to apply continuous pure moment (± 2 Nm) in flexion-extension with and without a follower load, lateral bending, and axial rotation. Intersegmental rotations of the fused, dynamically stabilized, and adjacent levels were measured and compared. Results In flexion-extension only, the rigid instrumentation at L4–5 caused a 78% decrease in the segment's ROM when compared with the intact specimen. To compensate, it caused an increase in motion at adjacent levels L1–2 (45.6%) and L2–3 (23.2%) only. The placement of the dynamic construct at L3–4 decreased the operated level's ROM by 80.4% (similar stability as the fusion at L4–5), when compared with the intact specimen, and caused a significant increase in motion at all tested adjacent levels. In flexion-extension with a follower load, instrumentation at L4–5 affected only a subadjacent level, L5–sacrum (52.0%), while causing a reduction in motion at the operated level (L4–5, −76.4%). The dynamic construct caused a significant increase in motion at the adjacent levels T12–L1 (44.9%), L1–2 (57.3%), and L5–sacrum (83.9%), while motion at the operated level (L3–4) was reduced by 76.7%. In lateral bending, instrumentation at L4–5 increased motion at only T12–L1 (22.8%). The dynamic construct at L3–4 caused an increase in motion at T12–L1 (69.9%), L1–2 (59.4%), L2–3 (44.7%), and L5–sacrum (43.7%). In axial rotation, only the placement of the dynamic construct at L3–4 caused a significant increase in motion of the adjacent levels L2–3 (25.1%) and L5–sacrum (31.4%). Conclusions The dynamic stabilization system displayed stability characteristics similar to a solid, all-metal construct. Its addition of the supraadjacent level (L3–4) to the fusion (L4–5) did protect the adjacent level from excessive motion. However, it essentially transformed a 1-level lumbar fusion into a 2-level lumbar fusion, with exponential transfer of motion to the fewer remaining discs.

The cervical end of an occipitocervical fusion: a biomechanical evaluation of 3 constructs

2008 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 296-300 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael A. Finn ◽  
Daniel R. Fassett ◽  
Todd D. Mccall ◽  
Randy Clark ◽  
Andrew T. Dailey ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Tracking System ◽  
Plate Fixation ◽  
Axial Rotation ◽  
Lateral Mass ◽  
Lateral Bending ◽  
Cross Link ◽  
3D Tracking ◽  
Flexion Extension ◽  
Biomechanical Evaluation ◽  
Rotation Motion

Object Stabilization with rigid screw/rod fixation is the treatment of choice for craniocervical disorders requiring operative stabilization. The authors compare the relative immediate stiffness for occipital plate fixation in concordance with transarticular screw fixation (TASF), C-1 lateral mass and C-2 pars screw (C1L-C2P), and C-1 lateral mass and C-2 laminar screw (C1L-C2L) constructs, with and without a cross-link. Methods Ten intact human cadaveric spines (Oc–C4) were prepared and mounted in a 7-axis spine simulator. Each specimen was precycled and then tested in the intact state for flexion/extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation. Motion was tracked using the OptoTRAK 3D tracking system. The specimens were then destabilized and instrumented with an occipital plate and TASF. The spine was tested with and without the addition of a cross-link. The C1L-C2P and C1L-C2L constructs were similarly tested. Results All constructs demonstrated a significant increase in stiffness after instrumentation. The C1L-C2P construct was equivalent to the TASF in all moments. The C1L-C2L was significantly weaker than the C1L-C2P construct in all moments and significantly weaker than the TASF in lateral bending. The addition of a cross-link made no difference in the stiffness of any construct. Conclusions All constructs provide significant immediate stability in the destabilized occipitocervical junction. Although the C1L-C2P construct performed best overall, the TASF was similar, and either one can be recommended. Decreased stiffness of the C1L-C2L construct might affect the success of clinical fusion. This construct should be reserved for cases in which anatomy precludes the use of the other two.

scholarly journals Biomechanical Analysis of Allograft Spacer Failure as a Function of Cortical-Cancellous Ratio in Anterior Cervical Discectomy/Fusion: Allograft Spacer Alone Model

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (18) ◽  
pp. 6413
Author(s):  
Ji-Won Kwon ◽  
Hwan-Mo Lee ◽  
Tae-Hyun Park ◽  
Sung Jae Lee ◽  
Young-Woo Kwon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Element Model ◽  
Axial Rotation ◽  
Biomechanical Analysis ◽  
Flexion Extension ◽  
Hybrid Motion ◽  
Anterior Cervical Discectomy Fusion ◽  
Flexion And Extension ◽  
Additional Fixation ◽  
Lateral Walls

The design and ratio of the cortico-cancellous composition of allograft spacers are associated with graft-related problems, including subsidence and allograft spacer failure. Methods: The study analyzed stress distribution and risk of subsidence according to three types (cortical only, cortical cancellous, cortical lateral walls with a cancellous center bone) and three lengths (11, 12, 14 mm) of allograft spacers under the condition of hybrid motion control, including flexion, extension, axial rotation, and lateral bending,. A detailed finite element model of a previously validated, three-dimensional, intact C3–7 segment, with C5–6 segmental fusion using allograft spacers without fixation, was used in the present study. Findings: Among the three types of cervical allograft spacers evaluated, cortical lateral walls with a cancellous center bone exhibited the highest stress on the cortical bone of spacers, as well as the endplate around the posterior margin of the spacers. The likelihood of allograft spacer failure was highest for 14 mm spacers composed of cortical lateral walls with a cancellous center bone upon flexion (PVMS, 270.0 MPa; 250.2%) and extension (PVMS: 371.40 MPa, 344.2%). The likelihood of allograft spacer subsidence was also highest for the same spacers upon flexion (PVMS, 4.58 MPa; 28.1%) and extension (PVMS: 12.71 MPa, 78.0%). Conclusion: Cervical spacers with a smaller cortical component and of longer length can be risk factors for allograft spacer failure and subsidence, especially in flexion and extension. However, further study of additional fixation methods, such as anterior plates/screws and posterior screws, in an actual clinical setting is necessary.

Biomechanical Consequences of Cervical Spondylectomy Versus Corpectomy

2008 ◽  
Vol 63 (suppl_4) ◽  
pp. ONS303-ONS308 ◽  
Author(s):  
Şeref Doğan ◽  
Seungwon Baek ◽  
Volker K.H. Sonntag ◽  
Neil R. Crawford
Keyword(s):  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Axial Rotation ◽  
Posterior Fixation ◽  
Spinal Stability ◽  
Angular Range ◽  
Anterior Instrumentation ◽  
Lateral Bending ◽  
Cervical Corpectomy ◽  
Flexion Extension ◽  
Anterior Plating

Abstract Objective: To evaluate the differences in spinal stability and stabilizing potential of instrumentation after cervical corpectomy and spondylectomy. Methods: Seven human cadaveric specimens were tested: 1) intact; 2) after grafted C5 corpectomy and anterior C4–C6 plate; 3) after adding posterior C4–C6 screws/rods; 4) after extending posteriorly to C3–C7; 5) after grafted C5 spondylectomy, anterior C4–C6 plate, and posterior C4–C6 screws/rods; and 6) after extending posteriorly to C3–C7. Pure moments induced flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation; angular motion was recorded optically. Results: After corpectomy, anterior plating alone reduced the angular range of motion to a mean of 30% of normal, whereas added posterior short- or long-segment hardware reduced range of motion significantly more (P < 0.003), to less than 5% of normal. Constructs with posterior rods spanning C3–C7 were stiffer than constructs with posterior rods spanning C4–C6 during flexion, extension, and lateral bending (P < 0.05), but not during axial rotation (P > 0.07). Combined anterior and C4–C6 posterior fixation exhibited greater stiffness after corpectomy than after spondylectomy during lateral bending (P = 0.019) and axial rotation (P = 0.001). Combined anterior and C3–C7 posterior fixation exhibited greater stiffness after corpectomy than after spondylectomy during extension (P = 0.030) and axial rotation (P = 0.0001). Conclusion: Circumferential fixation provides more stability than anterior instrumentation alone after cervical corpectomy. After corpectomy or spondylectomy, long circumferential instrumentation provides better stability than short circumferential fixation except during axial rotation. Circumferential fixation more effectively prevents axial rotation after corpectomy than after spondylectomy.

Anterior cervical fusion: a biomechanical comparison of 4 techniques

2008 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. 444-449 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabio Galbusera ◽  
Chiara M. Bellini ◽  
Francesco Costa ◽  
Roberto Assietti ◽  
Maurizio Fornari
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Locking Plate ◽  
Axial Rotation ◽  
Finite Element Models ◽  
Interbody Cage ◽  
Lateral Bending ◽  
Flexion Extension ◽  
Pure Moment ◽  
Fixation Type ◽  
Biomechanical Comparison

Object Cervical instrumented fusion is currently performed using several fixation methods. In the present paper, the authors compare the following 4 implantation methods: a stand-alone cage, a cage supplemented by an anterior locking plate, a cage supplemented by an anterior dynamic plate, and a dynamic combined plate–cage device. Methods Four finite element models of the C4–7 segments were built, each including a different instrumented fixation type at the C5–6 level. A compressive preload of 100 N combined with a pure moment of 2.5 Nm in flexion, extension, right lateral bending, and right axial rotation was applied to the 4 models. The segmental principal ranges of motion and the load shared by the interbody cage were obtained for each simulation. Results The stand-alone cage showed the lowest stabilization capability among the 4 configurations investigated, but it was still significant. The cage supplemented by the locking plate was very stiff in all directions. The 2 dynamic plate configurations reduced flexibility in all directions compared with the intact case, but they left significant mobility in the implanted segment. These configurations were able to share a significant part of the load (up to 40% for the combined plate–cage) through the posterior cage. The highest risk of subsidence was obtained with the model of the stand-alone cage. Conclusions Noticeable differences in the results were detected for the 4 configurations. The actual clinical relevance of these differences, currently considered not of critical importance, should be investigated by randomized clinical trials.

Biomechanical analysis of Goel technique for C1–2 fusion

2011 ◽  
Vol 14 (5) ◽  
pp. 639-646 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jon Park ◽  
Justin K. Scheer ◽  
T. Jesse Lim ◽  
Vedat Deviren ◽  
Christopher P. Ames
Keyword(s):  
Motion Tracking ◽  
Tracking System ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Pedicle Screws ◽  
Axial Rotation ◽  
Biomechanical Analysis ◽  
Lateral Bending ◽  
Flexion Extension ◽  
Rod System ◽  
Harms Technique

Object The Goel technique, in which C1–2 intraarticular spacers are used, may be performed to restore stability to a disrupted atlantoaxial complex in conjunction with the Harms technique of placing polyaxial screws and bilateral rods. However, it has yet to be determined biomechanically whether the addition of the C1–2 joint spacers increases the multiaxial rigidity of the fixation construct. The goal of this study was to quantify changes in multiaxial rigidity of the combined Goel-Harms technique with the addition of C1–2 intraarticular spacers. Methods Seven cadaveric cervical spines (occiput–C2) were submitted to nondestructive flexion-extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation tests in a material testing machine spine tester. The authors applied 1.5 Nm at a rate of 0.1 Nm/second and held it constant for 10 seconds. The specimens were loaded 3 times, and data were collected on the third cycle. Testing of the specimens was performed for the following groups: 1) intact (I); 2) with the addition of C-1 lateral mass/C-2 pedicle screws and rod system (I+SR); 3) with C1–2 joint capsule incision, decortication (2 mm on top and bottom of each joint [that is, the C-1 and C-2 surface) and addition of bilateral C1–2 intraarticular spacers at C1–2 junction to the screws and rods (I+SR+C); 4) after removal of the posterior rods and only the bilateral spacers in place (I+C); 5) after removal of spacers and further destabilization with simulated odontoidectomy for a completely destabilized case (D); 6) with addition of posterior rods to the destabilized case (D+SR); and 7) with addition of bilateral C1–2 intraarticular spacers at C1–2 junction to the destabilized case (D+SR+C). The motion of C-1 was measured by a 3D motion tracking system and the motion of C-2 was measured by the rotational sensor of the testing system. The range of motion (ROM) and neutral zone (NZ) across C-1 and C-2 were evaluated. Results For the intact spine test groups, the addition of screws/rods (I+SR) and screws/rods/cages (I+SR+C) significantly reduced ROM and NZ compared with the intact spine (I) for flexion-extension and axial rotation (p < 0.05) but not lateral bending (p > 0.05). The 2 groups were not significantly different from each other in any bending mode for ROM and NZ, but in the destabilized condition the addition of screws/rods (D+SR) and screws/rods/cages (D+SR+C) significantly reduced ROM and NZ compared with the destabilized spine (D) in all bending modes (p < 0.05). Furthermore, the addition of the C1–2 intraarticular spacers (D+SR+C) significantly reduced ROM (flexion-extension and axial rotation) and NZ (lateral bending) compared with the screws and rods alone (D+SR). Conclusions Study result indicated that both the Goel and Harms techniques alone and with the addition of the C1–2 intraarticular spacers to the Goel-Harms technique are advantageous for stabilizing the atlantoaxial segment. The Goel technique combined with placement of a screw/rod construct appears to result in additional construct rigidity beyond the screw/rod technique and appears to be more useful in very unstable cases.

scholarly journals Development and initial evaluation of a finite element model of the pediatric craniocervical junction

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 497-503 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rinchen Phuntsok ◽  
Marcus D. Mazur ◽  
Benjamin J. Ellis ◽  
Vijay M. Ravindra ◽  
Douglas L. Brockmeyer
Keyword(s):  
Finite Element ◽  
Finite Element Model ◽  
Material Properties ◽  
Element Model ◽  
Axial Rotation ◽  
Craniocervical Junction ◽  
Lateral Bending ◽  
Fem Method ◽  
Flexion Extension ◽  
Ligament Stiffness

OBJECT There is a significant deficiency in understanding the biomechanics of the pediatric craniocervical junction (CCJ) (occiput–C2), primarily because of a lack of human pediatric cadaveric tissue and the relatively small number of treated patients. To overcome this deficiency, a finite element model (FEM) of the pediatric CCJ was created using pediatric geometry and parameterized adult material properties. The model was evaluated under the physiological range of motion (ROM) for flexion-extension, axial rotation, and lateral bending and under tensile loading. METHODS This research utilizes the FEM method, which is a numerical solution technique for discretizing and analyzing systems. The FEM method has been widely used in the field of biomechanics. A CT scan of a 13-month-old female patient was used to create the 3D geometry and surfaces of the FEM model, and an open-source FEM software suite was used to apply the material properties and boundary and loading conditions and analyze the model. The published adult ligament properties were reduced to 50%, 25%, and 10% of the original stiffness in various iterations of the model, and the resulting ROMs for flexion-extension, axial rotation, and lateral bending were compared. The flexion-extension ROMs and tensile stiffness that were predicted by the model were evaluated using previously published experimental measurements from pediatric cadaveric tissues. RESULTS The model predicted a ROM within 1 standard deviation of the published pediatric ROM data for flexion-extension at 10% of adult ligament stiffness. The model's response in terms of axial tension also coincided well with published experimental tension characterization data. The model behaved relatively stiffer in extension than in flexion. The axial rotation and lateral bending results showed symmetric ROM, but there are currently no published pediatric experimental data available for comparison. The model predicts a relatively stiffer ROM in both axial rotation and lateral bending in comparison with flexion-extension. As expected, the flexion-extension, axial rotation, and lateral bending ROMs increased with the decrease in ligament stiffness. CONCLUSIONS An FEM of the pediatric CCJ was created that accurately predicts flexion-extension ROM and axial force displacement of occiput–C2 when the ligament material properties are reduced to 10% of the published adult ligament properties. This model gives a reasonable prediction of pediatric cervical spine ligament stiffness, the relationship between flexion-extension ROM, and ligament stiffness at the CCJ. The creation of this model using open-source software means that other researchers will be able to use the model as a starting point for research.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document