STUDY DESIGN: Comparative in vitro biomechanical study and finite element analysis. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the bending strength and pullout strength of conical pedicle screws, as compared with conventional cylindrical screws. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Transpedicle screw fixation, the gold standard of spinal fixation, is threatened by screw failure. Conical screws can resist screw breakage and loosening. However, biomechanical studies of bending strength have been lacking, and the results of pullout studies have varied widely. METHODS: Ten types of pedicle screws with different patterns of core tapering and core diameter were specially manufactured with good control of all other design factors. The stiffness, yielding strength, and fatigue life of the pedicle screws were assessed by cantilever bending tests using high-molecular-weight polyethylene. The pullout strength was assessed by pullout tests using polyurethane foam. Concurrently, 3-dimensional finite element models simulating these mechanical tests were created, and the results were correlated to those of the mechanical tests. RESULTS: In bending tests, conical screws had substantially higher stiffness, yielding strength, and fatigue life than cylindrical screws (P<0.01), especially when there was no step at the thread-shank junction. In pullout tests, pullout strength was higher in screws with a conical core and smaller core diameter and also in situations with higher foam density (P<0.01). In finite element analysis, the maximal deflection and maximal tensile stress were closely related to yielding strength (r=-0.91) and fatigue life (r=-0.95), respectively, in the bending analyses. The total reaction force was closely related to the pullout strength in pullout analyses (r=0.84 and 0.91 for different foam densities). CONCLUSIONS: Conical screws effectively increased the bending strength and pullout strength simultaneously. The finite element analyses reliably predicted the results of the mechanical tests.
STUDY DESIGN: Comparative in vitro biomechanical study and finite element analysis. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the bending strength and pullout strength of conical pedicle screws, as compared with conventional cylindrical screws. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Transpedicle screw fixation, the gold standard of spinal fixation, is threatened by screw failure. Conical screws can resist screw breakage and loosening. However, biomechanical studies of bending strength have been lacking, and the results of pullout studies have varied widely. METHODS: Ten types of pedicle screws with different patterns of core tapering and core diameter were specially manufactured with good control of all other design factors. The stiffness, yielding strength, and fatigue life of the pedicle screws were assessed by cantilever bending tests using high-molecular-weight polyethylene. The pullout strength was assessed by pullout tests using polyurethane foam. Concurrently, 3-dimensional finite element models simulating these mechanical tests were created, and the results were correlated to those of the mechanical tests. RESULTS: In bending tests, conical screws had substantially higher stiffness, yielding strength, and fatigue life than cylindrical screws (P<0.01), especially when there was no step at the thread-shank junction. In pullout tests, pullout strength was higher in screws with a conical core and smaller core diameter and also in situations with higher foam density (P<0.01). In finite element analysis, the maximal deflection and maximal tensile stress were closely related to yielding strength (r=-0.91) and fatigue life (r=-0.95), respectively, in the bending analyses. The total reaction force was closely related to the pullout strength in pullout analyses (r=0.84 and 0.91 for different foam densities). CONCLUSIONS: Conical screws effectively increased the bending strength and pullout strength simultaneously. The finite element analyses reliably predicted the results of the mechanical tests.
Authors: Thomas M Shea; Jake Laun; Sabrina A Gonzalez-Blohm; James J Doulgeris; William E Lee; Kamran Aghayev; Frank D Vrionis Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2014-03-03 Impact factor: 3.411