Literature DB >> 16371899

Effects of charité artificial disc on the implanted and adjacent spinal segments mechanics using a hybrid testing protocol.

Vijay K Goel1, Jonathan N Grauer, Tushar Ch Patel, Ashok Biyani, Koichi Sairyo, Srilakshmi Vishnubhotla, Aaron Matyas, Ian Cowgill, Miranda Shaw, Rebecca Long, David Dick, Manohar M Panjabi, Hassan Serhan.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: Finite element model of L3-S1 segment and confirmatory cadaveric testing were used to investigate the biomechanical effects of a mobile core type artificial disc (Charité artificial disc; DePuy Spine, Raynham, MA) on the lumbar spine.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the effects of the Charité artificial disc across the implanted and adjacent segments. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Biomechanical studies of artificial discs that quantify parameters, like the load sharing and stresses, are sparse in the literature, especially for mobile-type core artificial disc designs. In addition, there is no standard protocol for studying the adjacent segmental effects of such implants.
METHODS: Human osteo-ligamentous spines (L1-S1) were tested before and after L5-S1 Charité artificial disc placement. The data were used to validate further an intact 3-dimensional (3-D) nonlinear L3-S1 finite element model. The model was subjected to 400-N axial compression and 10.6 Nm of flexion/extension pure moments (load control) or pure moments that produced the overall rotation of the L3-S1 Charité model equal to the intact case (hybrid approach). Resultant motion, load, and stress parameters were analyzed at the experimental and adjacent levels.
RESULTS: Finite element model validation was achieved only with the load-controlled experiments. The hybrid approach, believed to be more clinically relevant, revealed that Charité artificial disc leads to motion increases in flexion (19%) and extension (44%) at the L5-S1 level. At the instrumented level, the decrease in the facet loads was less than at the adjacent levels; the corresponding decrease being 26% at L3-L4, 25% at L4-L5, and 13.4% at L5-S1 when compared to the intact. Intradiscal pressure changes in the L4-L5 and L3-L4 segments were minimal. Shear stresses at the Charité artificial disc-L5 endplate interface were higher than those at S1 interface. However, in the load control mode, the increase in facet loads in extension was approximately 14%, as compared to the intact case.
CONCLUSIONS: The hybrid testing protocol is advocated because it better reproduces clinical observations in terms of motion following surgery, using pure moments. Using this approach, we found that the Charité artificial disc placement slightly increases motion at the implanted level, with a resultant increase in facet loading when compared to the adjacent segments, while the motions and loads decrease at the adjacent levels. However, in the load control mode that we believe is not that clinically relevant, there was a large increase in motion and a corresponding increase in facet loads, as compared to the intact.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16371899     DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000195897.17277.67

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


  44 in total

1.  Biomechanical evaluation of the Total Facet Arthroplasty System® (TFAS®): loading as compared to a rigid posterior instrumentation system.

Authors:  Simon G Sjovold; Qingan Zhu; Anton Bowden; Chad R Larson; Peter M de Bakker; Marta L Villarraga; Jorge A Ochoa; David M Rosler; Peter A Cripton
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-03-10       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Sacroiliac Joint Fusion Minimally Affects Adjacent Lumbar Segment Motion: A Finite Element Study.

Authors:  Derek P Lindsey; Ali Kiapour; Scott A Yerby; Vijay K Goel
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2015-11-13

3.  Three dimensional finite element analysis of the pediatric lumbar spine. Part II: biomechanical change as the initiating factor for pediatric isthmic spondylolisthesis at the growth plate.

Authors:  Koichi Sairyo; Vijay K Goel; Akiyoshi Masuda; Srilakshmi Vishnubhotla; Ahmad Faizan; Ashok Biyani; Nabil Ebraheim; Daisuke Yonekura; Ri-Ichi Murakami; Tomoya Terai
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2006-04-14       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  Kinematic evaluation of one- and two-level Maverick lumbar total disc replacement caudal to a long thoracolumbar spinal fusion.

Authors:  Qingan Zhu; Eyal Itshayek; Claire F Jones; Timothy Schwab; Chadwick R Larson; Lawrence G Lenke; Peter A Cripton
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-04-25       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 5.  [Revision surgery after implantation of a vertebral disc prosthesis].

Authors:  C Hopf
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 1.087

Review 6.  Design concepts in lumbar total disc arthroplasty.

Authors:  Fabio Galbusera; Chiara M Bellini; Thomas Zweig; Stephen Ferguson; Manuela T Raimondi; Claudio Lamartina; Marco Brayda-Bruno; Maurizio Fornari
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2008-10-23       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  Evaluation of biomechanical properties of anterior atlantoaxial transarticular locking plate system using three-dimensional finite element analysis.

Authors:  Xian-hua Cai; Zhi-chao Liu; Yang Yu; Mei-chao Zhang; Wei-bing Huang
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2013-07-03       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  The effect of different design concepts in lumbar total disc arthroplasty on the range of motion, facet joint forces and instantaneous center of rotation of a L4-5 segment.

Authors:  Hendrik Schmidt; Stefan Midderhoff; Kyle Adkins; Hans-Joachim Wilke
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  StabilimaxNZ) versus simulated fusion: evaluation of adjacent-level effects.

Authors:  Manohar M Panjabi; Gweneth Henderson; Yue James; Jens Peter Timm
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2007-10-09       Impact factor: 3.134

10.  The influence of intrinsic disc degeneration of the adjacent segments on its stress distribution after one-level lumbar fusion.

Authors:  Ho-Joong Kim; Kyoung-Tak Kang; Heoung-Jae Chun; Choon-Ki Lee; Bong-Soon Chang; Jin S Yeom
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-07-15       Impact factor: 3.134

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.