Literature DB >> 18628704

Cement distribution, volume, and compliance in vertebroplasty: some answers from an anatomy-based nonlinear finite element study.

Yan Chevalier1, Dieter Pahr, Mathieu Charlebois, Paul Heini, Erich Schneider, Philippe Zysset.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: The biomechanics of vertebral bodies augmented with real distributions of cement were investigated using nonlinear finite element (FE) analysis.
OBJECTIVES: To compare stiffness, strength, and stress transfer of augmented versus nonaugmented osteoporotic vertebral bodies under compressive loading. Specifically, to examine how cement distribution, volume, and compliance affect these biomechanical variables. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Previous FE studies suggested that vertebroplasty might alter vertebral stress transfer, leading to adjacent vertebral failure. However, no FE study so far accounted for real cement distributions and bone damage accumulation.
METHODS: Twelve vertebral bodies scanned with high-resolution pQCT and tested in compression were augmented with various volumes of cements and scanned again. Nonaugmented and augmented pQCT datasets were converted to FE models, with bone properties modeled with an elastic, plastic and damage constitutive law that was previously calibrated for the nonaugmented models. The cement-bone composite was modeled with a rule of mixture. The nonaugmented and augmented FE models were subjected to compression and their stiffness, strength, and stress map calculated for different cement compliances.
RESULTS: Cement distribution dominated the stiffening and strengthening effects of augmentation. Models with cement connecting either the superior or inferior endplate (S/I fillings) were only up to 2 times stiffer than the nonaugmented models with minimal strengthening, whereas those with cement connecting both endplates (S + I fillings) were 1 to 8 times stiffer and 1 to 12 times stronger. Stress increases above and below the cement, which was higher for the S + I cases and was significantly reduced by increasing cement compliance.
CONCLUSION: The developed FE approach, which accounts for real cement distributions and bone damage accumulation, provides a refined insight into the mechanics of augmented vertebral bodies. In particular, augmentation with compliant cement bridging both endplates would reduce stress transfer while providing sufficient strengthening.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18628704     DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31817c750b

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


  29 in total

1.  The effect of standard and low-modulus cement augmentation on the stiffness, strength, and endplate pressure distribution in vertebroplasty.

Authors:  Michael Kinzl; Lorin M Benneker; Andreas Boger; Philippe K Zysset; Dieter H Pahr
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-12-15       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures augmentation by injectable partly resorbable ceramic bone substitute (Cerament™|SPINE SUPPORT): a prospective nonrandomized study.

Authors:  Salvatore Masala; Giovanni Nano; Stefano Marcia; Mario Muto; Francesco Paolo Maria Fucci; Giovanni Simonetti
Journal:  Neuroradiology       Date:  2011-08-11       Impact factor: 2.804

Review 3.  [Stabilization of the osteoporotic spine from a biomechanical viewpoint].

Authors:  C-E Heyde; A Rohlmann; U Weber; R Kayser
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 1.087

Review 4.  Finite Element-Based Mechanical Assessment of Bone Quality on the Basis of In Vivo Images.

Authors:  Dieter H Pahr; Philippe K Zysset
Journal:  Curr Osteoporos Rep       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 5.096

5.  In vitro comparative assessment of the mechanical properties of PMMA cement and a GPC cement for vertebroplasty.

Authors:  Omar Ali Abouazza; Finbarr Condon; Ailish Hannigan; Colum Dunne
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2016-02-23

6.  A probabilistic finite element analysis of the stresses in the augmented vertebral body after vertebroplasty.

Authors:  Antonius Rohlmann; Hadi Nabil Boustani; Georg Bergmann; Thomas Zander
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2010-04-02       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  Osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture augmentation by injectable partly resorbable ceramic bone substitute (Cerament™|SPINESUPPORT): a prospective nonrandomized study.

Authors:  Salvatore Masala; Giovanni Nano; Stefano Marcia; Mario Muto; Francesco P M Fucci; Giovanni Simonetti
Journal:  Neuroradiology       Date:  2012-03-06       Impact factor: 2.804

8.  The proper volume and distribution of cement augmentation on percutaneous vertebroplasty.

Authors:  Dong Joon Kim; Tae Wan Kim; Kwan Ho Park; Moon Pyo Chi; Jae O Kim
Journal:  J Korean Neurosurg Soc       Date:  2010-08-31

9.  Mechanical properties of blood-mixed polymethylmetacrylate in percutaneous vertebroplasty.

Authors:  Dong Ki Ahn; Song Lee; Dea Jung Choi; Soon Yeol Park; Dae Gon Woo; Chi Hoon Kim; Han Sung Kim
Journal:  Asian Spine J       Date:  2009-12-31

10.  Vertebroplasty and Kyphoplasty Can Restore Normal Spine Mechanics following Osteoporotic Vertebral Fracture.

Authors:  Jin Luo; Michael A Adams; Patricia Dolan
Journal:  J Osteoporos       Date:  2010-06-20
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.