Literature DB >> 10616063

Stabilizing effect of posterior lumbar interbody fusion cages before and after cyclic loading.

A Kettler1, H J Wilke, R Dietl, M Krammer, C Lumenta, L Claes.   

Abstract

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.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10616063     DOI: 10.3171/spi.2000.92.1.0087

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosurg        ISSN: 0022-3085            Impact factor:   5.115


  13 in total

1.  Anterior lumbar interbody fusion with stand-alone interbody cage in treatment of lumbar intervertebral foraminal stenosis : comparative study of two different types of cages.

Authors:  Chul-Bum Cho; Kyeong-Sik Ryu; Chun-Kun Park
Journal:  J Korean Neurosurg Soc       Date:  2010-05-31

2.  The importance of the endplate for interbody cages in the lumbar spine.

Authors:  Anne Polikeit; Stephen J Ferguson; Lutz P Nolte; Tracy E Orr
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2003-05-29       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Factors influencing stresses in the lumbar spine after the insertion of intervertebral cages: finite element analysis.

Authors:  Anne Polikeit; Stephen J Ferguson; Lutz P Nolte; Tracy E Orr
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2002-12-19       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 4.  [Vertebral body replacement in spine surgery].

Authors:  F Kandziora; K J Schnake; C K Klostermann; N P Haas
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 1.000

5.  [Biodegradable cage. Osteointegration in spondylodesis of the sheep cervical spine].

Authors:  R Pflugmacher; T Eindorf; M Scholz; S Gumnior; C Krall; P Schleicher; N P Haas; F Kandziora
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 0.955

6.  Stand-alone ALIF with integrated intracorporeal anchoring plates in the treatment of degenerative lumbar disc disease: a prospective study on 65 cases.

Authors:  Jérôme Allain; Joël Delecrin; Jacques Beaurain; Alexandre Poignard; Thierry Vila; Charles-Henri Flouzat-Lachaniette
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-06-22       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 7.  [Intervertebral cages from a biomechanical point of view].

Authors:  W Schmoelz; A Keiler
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 1.087

8.  Can cavity-based pedicle screw augmentation decrease screw loosening? A biomechanical in vitro study.

Authors:  Hans-Joachim Riesner; Thomas R Blattert; Renate Krezdorn; Simone Schädler; Hans-Joachim Wilke
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2020-12-23       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  Georg Schmorl Prize of the German Spine Society (DWG) 2020: new biomechanical in vitro test method to determine subsidence risk of vertebral body replacements.

Authors:  Laura Zengerle; Christoph Fleege; Theodor Di Pauli von Treuheim; Daniel Vogele; Michael Rauschmann; Hans-Joachim Wilke
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2021-03-17       Impact factor: 3.134

10.  The distribution of mineral density in the cervical vertebral endplates.

Authors:  Magdalena Müller-Gerbl; Stefan Weißer; Ulrich Linsenmeier
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2008-01-12       Impact factor: 3.134

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.