Literature DB >> 12221352

Biomechanical evaluation of a bipedicular spinal fixation system: a comparative stiffness test.

Laurent Balabaud1, Emeric Gallard, Wafa Skalli, Jean-Pierre Lassau, François Lavaste, Jean-Paul Steib.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: This biomechanical study using cadaver thoracic spines evaluated the initial stiffness of two different fixation constructs using a new spinal implant: the bipedicular spinal fixation device (BSF).
OBJECTIVE: To compare the biomechanical stiffness of a new construct using BSF with a regular construct using pedicular and laminar hooks. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Disadvantages of thoracic posterior implants and developments in in situ rod contouring led to the creation of a new implant for spine deformity surgery that would provide immediate stiffness to preserve spine correction, allow efficient postoperative rehabilitation, and obtain a good fusion rate.
METHODS: Two age-paired groups of six human thoracic spines each (T3-T12) were compared: a regular group whose construct was in accordance with the Cotrel-Dubousset technique and the BSF group. In both groups, the spines were tested intact and then after injury. An injury was induced by transections of interspinous and anterior longitudinal ligaments and anterior discectomies. A three-dimensional ultrasonic measurement device, the Zebris 3D Motion Analyzer, was used to record the motion of the T6 relative to the T8 vertebra under loads, and to determine the ranges of motion (ROMs) between intact spines and the spine construct.
RESULTS: In flexion-extension, the regular construct showed a significantly greater mean of relative ROMs than the BSF construct for principal rotation (88% and 69% respectively, P = 0.015). However, no significant differences were demonstrated in any of the other motions.
CONCLUSION: The BSF construct showed stiffness similar to that of the regular construct, encouraging clinical investigation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12221352     DOI: 10.1097/00007632-200209010-00013

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


  2 in total

1.  Biomechanical evaluation of a bipedicular spinal fixation device: three different strength tests.

Authors:  Laurent Balabaud; Emeric Gallard; Wafa Skalli; Bernard Dupas; Robert Roger; François Lavaste; Jean-Paul Steib
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2003-04-05       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Flexibility of thoracic spines under simultaneous multi-planar loading.

Authors:  Sean L Borkowski; Sophia N Sangiorgio; Richard E Bowen; Anthony A Scaduto; Juliann Kwak; Edward Ebramzadeh
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-08-05       Impact factor: 3.134

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.