Literature DB >> 15912346

Effect of different surgical strategies on screw forces after correction of scoliosis with a VDS implant.

Antonius Rohlmann1, Michael Richter, Thomas Zander, Constantin Klöckner, Georg Bergmann.   

Abstract

Pullout of the cranial end-vertebra screw following the correction of a scoliosis with the VDS implant is a common complication. Very little is known about the forces acting on the screws during ventral derotation spondylodesis (VDS) in ventral scoliosis surgery. These forces determine the risk of screw-loosening. The purpose of this study was to identify implant properties and to determine surgical correction strategies that reduce the risk of cranial end-vertebra screw pullout. For this aim, a three-dimensional nonlinear finite element model of a scoliotic thoracic spine was created with a Cobb angle of 61 degrees and 32 degrees rotation. The VDS implant was inserted between T5 and T9. The longitudinal rod diameter, the implant material and seven surgical correction strategies were examined to determine their influence on the Cobb angle as well as on derotation and on axial and transverse forces in the screws. A stiffer implant achieves a better correction but causes higher axial and transverse screw forces. Axial tensile forces act on the screws fixed to the cranial end vertebra and the middle vertebra, while axial compressive forces act on the other screws. A strong correction at the cranial segment leads to high axial and transverse screw forces in the farthest cranial screw and thus to a high risk of screw pullout. The resultant transverse force is often much higher than the axial force component. Simulation of local trunk muscle forces has only a minor effect on the results. The axial tensile forces and thus the risk of screw pullout are highest at the cranial end vertebra. A strategy in which surgical correction is strong in the middle segments and moderate in the outer ones leads to a good reduction of the Cobb angle, a wide derotation angle, and relatively low axial tensile forces at the cranial end vertebra screw.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15912346      PMCID: PMC3489315          DOI: 10.1007/s00586-005-0923-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Spine J        ISSN: 0940-6719            Impact factor:   3.134


  14 in total

1.  [Ventrodorsal correction and instrumentation in idiopathic scoliosis].

Authors:  C Klöckner; G Walter; J Matussek; U Weber
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 1.087

2.  A follower load increases the load-carrying capacity of the lumbar spine in compression.

Authors:  A G Patwardhan; R M Havey; K P Meade; B Lee; B Dunlap
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1999-05-15       Impact factor: 3.468

3.  Comparison between single-screw and triangulated, double-screw fixation in anterior spine surgery. A biomechanical test.

Authors:  M Ogon; C Haid; M Krismer; W Sterzinger; R Bauer
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1996-12-01       Impact factor: 3.468

4.  Mechanical properties of the human thoracic spine as shown by three-dimensional load-displacement curves.

Authors:  M M Panjabi; R A Brand; A A White
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1976-07       Impact factor: 5.284

5.  Mechanical response of a lumbar motion segment in axial torque alone and combined with compression.

Authors:  A Shirazi-Adl; A M Ahmed; S C Shrivastava
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1986-11       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  Interlaminar shear stresses and laminae separation in a disc. Finite element analysis of the L3-L4 motion segment subjected to axial compressive loads.

Authors:  V K Goel; B T Monroe; L G Gilbertson; P Brinckmann
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1995-03-15       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  Zielke instrumentation (VDS) for the correction of spinal curvature. Analysis of results in 66 patients.

Authors:  J H Moe; G A Purcell; D S Bradford
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1983-11       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 8.  Preoperative estimation of screw fixation strength in vertebral bodies.

Authors:  P Eysel; M Schwitalle; A Oberstein; J D Rompe; C Hopf; K Küllmer
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1998-01-15       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 9.  [Criteria for treatment of idiopathic scoliosis between 40 degrees and 50 degrees. Surgical vs. conservative therapy].

Authors:  C Hopf
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 1.087

Review 10.  [Ventral and dorsal correcting and stabilizing methods in idiopathic scoliosis. Long-term outcome].

Authors:  H Halm
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 1.087

View more
  4 in total

1.  Flexible non-fusion scoliosis correction systems reduce intervertebral rotation less than rigid implants and allow growth of the spine: a finite element analysis of different features of orthobiom.

Authors:  A Rohlmann; T Zander; N K Burra; G Bergmann
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2007-08-22       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Modulation of spinal shape with growth following implantation of a novel surgical implant.

Authors:  John G Burke; Enzo Vettorato; Gudrun Schöffmann; R Eddie Clutton; Tim S Drew; J N Alastair Gibson
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-10-11       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  An FE investigation simulating intra-operative corrective forces applied to correct scoliosis deformity.

Authors:  J Paige Little; Maree T Izatt; Robert D Labrom; Geoffrey N Askin; Clayton J Adam
Journal:  Scoliosis       Date:  2013-05-16

4.  Planning the Surgical Correction of Spinal Deformities: Toward the Identification of the Biomechanical Principles by Means of Numerical Simulation.

Authors:  Fabio Galbusera; Tito Bassani; Luigi La Barbera; Claudia Ottardi; Benedikt Schlager; Marco Brayda-Bruno; Tomaso Villa; Hans-Joachim Wilke
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2015-11-03
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.