Literature DB >> 11458147

Prediction of mechanical behaviors at interfaces between bone and two interbody cages of lumbar spine segments.

Y Kim1.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: The effects of mechanical parameters at bone-implant interfaces of the lumbar spine segments were investigated under various combined loadings using the finite element method.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the mechanical behaviors at bone-cage interfaces of lumbar spine segments with two interbody cages (two thread inserts). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: It is known that among many factors, relative micromotion at bone-implant interfaces can hinder bone growth into the surface pores of an implant. Loading conditions, mechanical properties of the materials, friction coefficients at the interfaces, and geometry of spinal segments would affect relative micromotion and spinal stability. In particular, relative micromotion is related closely to friction at bone-implant interfaces after arthroplasty.
METHODS: A finite element model of human L3-L4 lumbar segments with two titanium interbody cages was constructed. This finite element model was used to investigate mechanical behavior at the bone-cage interface. Relative micromotion (slip distance on the contact surfaces), posterior axial displacement, and stress were predicted for changes of friction coefficients, loading conditions, and age-related material-geometric properties of the spinal segments.
RESULTS: Relative micromotion (slip distance) at the interfaces was obvious at their edges under axial compression. The slip occurred primarily at the anterior edges under torsion with preload, whereas it occurred primarily at the edges of the left cage under lateral bending with preload. Relative micromotion at the interfaces increased significantly as the apparent density of cancellous bone or the friction coefficient of the interfaces decreased. A significant increase in slip distance at the anterior anulus occurred with an addition of torsion to the compressive preload.
CONCLUSIONS: Relative micromotion is sensitive to the friction coefficient of the interfaces, the bone density, and the loading conditions. A reduction in age-related bone density is less likely to allow bone growth into surface pores of the cage. However, it is likely that the larger the disc area or pedicle diameter, the more stable the interbody fusion of the spinal segments.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11458147     DOI: 10.1097/00007632-200107010-00010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  8 in total

1.  Lumbar interbody fusion: a parametric investigation of a novel cage design with and without posterior instrumentation.

Authors:  Fabio Galbusera; Hendrik Schmidt; Hans-Joachim Wilke
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-09-15       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Stand-alone cage for posterior lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of high-degree degenerative disc disease: design of a new device for an "old" technique. A prospective study on a series of 116 patients.

Authors:  Francesco Costa; Marco Sassi; Alessandro Ortolina; Andrea Cardia; Roberto Assietti; Alberto Zerbi; Martin Lorenzetti; Fabio Galbusera; Maurizio Fornari
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-03-15       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Biomechanical comparison of unilateral and bilateral pedicle screws fixation for transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion after decompressive surgery--a finite element analysis.

Authors:  Shih-Hao Chen; Shang-Chih Lin; Wen-Chi Tsai; Chih-Wei Wang; Shih-Heng Chao
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2012-05-16       Impact factor: 2.362

4.  Early Postoperative Loss of Disc Height Following Transforaminal and Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Radiographic Analysis.

Authors:  Arun-Kumar Kaliya-Perumal; Tamara Lee Ting Soh; Mark Tan; Jacob Yoong-Leong Oh
Journal:  Asian Spine J       Date:  2021-11-18

5.  Biomechanical Analysis of an S1 Pedicle Screw Salvage Technique via a Superior Articulating Process Entry Point.

Authors:  Yu-Po Lee; Hansel E Ihn; Michelle H McGarry; Saifal-Deen Farhan; Nitin Bhatia; Thay Q Lee
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2016-07-01       Impact factor: 3.241

6.  Biomechanical comparison of a new stand-alone anterior lumbar interbody fusion cage with established fixation techniques - a three-dimensional finite element analysis.

Authors:  Shih-Hao Chen; Ching-Lung Tai; Chien-Yu Lin; Pang-Hsing Hsieh; Weng-Pin Chen
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2008-06-18       Impact factor: 2.362

7.  Biomechanical comparison of three stand-alone lumbar cages--a three-dimensional finite element analysis.

Authors:  Shih-Hao Chen; Ming-Chieh Chiang; Jin-Fu Lin; Shang-Chih Lin; Ching-Hua Hung
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2013-10-02       Impact factor: 2.362

8.  Comparison of unilateral pedicle screw fixation and interbody fusion with PEEK cage vs. standalone expandable fusion cage for the treatment of unilateral lumbar disc herniation.

Authors:  Jinlei Zhang; Aixing Pan; Li Zhou; Jingyi Yu; Xiao Zhang
Journal:  Arch Med Sci       Date:  2018-04-06       Impact factor: 3.318

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.