Literature DB >> 14588296

Influence of bone mineral density on pedicle screw fixation: a study of pedicle screw fixation augmenting posterior lumbar interbody fusion in elderly patients.

K Okuyama1, E Abe, T Suzuki, Y Tamura, M Chiba, K Sato.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Some biomechanical studies have demonstrated that bone mineral density of the lumbar spine (BMD) affects the stability of pedicle screws in vitro.
PURPOSE: To investigate influence of BMD on loosening and related failure of pedicle screws in vivo. STUDY DESIGN/
SETTING: A clinical study of 52 patients who underwent pedicle screw fixation augmenting posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). PATIENT SAMPLE: There were 13 men and 39 women, with an average age of 63 years (range, 45-76 years) at the time of operation. The mean follow-up period was 2.8 years (range, 2-6 years). OUTCOME MEASURES: Relationship between BMD, screw loosening, and its related failures were statistically analyzed.
METHODS: BMD was measured by the dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) method. Radiographic assessments were done by the first author and independently by another orthopedist who was not informed of the values of BMD.
RESULTS: The mean BMD of all patients was 0.879 +/- 0.215 (mean +/- S.D.) g/cm2. The mean BMD in patients with and without screw loosening was 0.720 +/- 0.078 g/cm2 (n=11) and 0.922 +/- 0.221 g/cm2 (n=41). There was a significant difference between the mean BMD of patients with and without screw loosening (P<.01). The mean BMD of patients with "union," "nonunion" and "undetermined union" was 0.934 +/- 0.210 g/cm2 (n=40), 0.674 +/- 0.104 g/cm2 (n=4) and 0.710 +/- 0.116 g/cm2 (n=8), respectively. The mean BMD of patients with "union" was significantly greater than those with "nonunion" and "undetermined union" (P<.05).
CONCLUSION: It could be concluded that BMD has a close relation with the stability of pedicle screws in vivo, and BMD value below 0.674 +/- 0.104 g/cm2 suggests a potential increased risk of "nonunion" when pedicle screw fixation is performed in conjunction with PLIF.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 14588296     DOI: 10.1016/s1529-9430(01)00078-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine J        ISSN: 1529-9430            Impact factor:   4.166


  50 in total

1.  Assessment of the morpho-densitometric parameters of the lumbar pedicles in osteoporotic and control women undergoing routine abdominal MDCT examinations.

Authors:  Antonios E Papadakis; Apostolos H Karantanas; Giorgos Papadokostakis; John Damilakis
Journal:  J Bone Miner Metab       Date:  2010-10-26       Impact factor: 2.626

2.  Biomechanical evaluation of an expansive pedicle screw in calf vertebrae.

Authors:  Wei Lei; Zixiang Wu
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2005-04-30       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 3.  Surgical treatment options in patients with impaired bone quality.

Authors:  Norman A Johanson; Jody Litrenta; Jay M Zampini; Frederic Kleinbart; Haviva M Goldman
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Quantitative dual-energy CT for phantomless evaluation of cancellous bone mineral density of the vertebral pedicle: correlation with pedicle screw pull-out strength.

Authors:  Julian L Wichmann; Christian Booz; Stefan Wesarg; Ralf W Bauer; J Matthias Kerl; Sebastian Fischer; Thomas Lehnert; Thomas J Vogl; M Fawad Khan; Konstantinos Kafchitsas
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2014-12-07       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  Biomechanical study of the funnel technique applied in thoracic pedicle screw replacement.

Authors:  Yi-Jiang Huang; Mao-Xiu Peng; Shao-Qi He; Liang-Le Liu; Ming-Hai Dai; Chenxuan Tang
Journal:  Afr Health Sci       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 0.927

6.  Pull-out strength of patient-specific template-guided vs. free-hand fluoroscopically controlled thoracolumbar pedicle screws: a biomechanical analysis of a randomized cadaveric study.

Authors:  A Aichmair; M Moser; M R Bauer; E Bachmann; J G Snedeker; M Betz; M Farshad
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2017-03-04       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  A pedicle screw system and a lamina hook system provide similar primary and long-term stability: a biomechanical in vitro study with quasi-static and dynamic loading conditions.

Authors:  Hans-Joachim Wilke; Dominik Kaiser; David Volkheimer; Carsten Hackenbroch; Klaus Püschel; Michael Rauschmann
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-07-12       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  Assessment of different screw augmentation techniques and screw designs in osteoporotic spines.

Authors:  S Becker; A Chavanne; R Spitaler; K Kropik; N Aigner; M Ogon; H Redl
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2008-09-10       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  A demineralized calf vertebra model as an alternative to classic osteoporotic vertebra models for pedicle screw pullout studies.

Authors:  Atilla Akbay; Gokhan Bozkurt; Ozgur Ilgaz; Selcuk Palaoglu; Nejat Akalan; Edward C Benzel
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2007-11-17       Impact factor: 3.134

10.  Impact of instrumentation in lumbar spinal fusion in elderly patients: 71 patients followed for 2-7 years.

Authors:  Thomas Andersen; Finn B Christensen; Bent Niedermann; Peter Helmig; Kristian Høy; Ebbe S Hansen; Cody Bünger
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 3.717

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.