Literature DB >> 19540816

Biomechanical characterization of an annulus-sparing spinal disc prosthesis.

Glenn R Buttermann1, Brian P Beaubien.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Current spine arthroplasty devices require disruption of the annulus fibrosus for implantation. Preliminary studies of a unique annulus-sparing intervertebral prosthetic disc (IPD) found that preservation of the annulus resulted in load sharing of the annulus with the prosthesis.
PURPOSE: Determine flexibility of the IPD versus fusion constructs in normal and degenerated human spines. STUDY DESIGN/
SETTING: Biomechanical comparison of motion segments in the intact, fusion and mechanical nucleus replacement states for normal and degenerated states. PATIENT
SETTING: Thirty lumbar motion segments. OUTCOMES MEASURES: Intervertebral height; motion segment range of motion, neutral zone, stiffness.
METHODS: Motion segments had multidirectional flexibility testing to 7.5Nm for intact discs, discs reconstructed using the IPD (n=12), or after anterior/posterior fusions (n=18). Interbody height and axial compression stiffness changes were determined for the reconstructed discs by applying axial compression to 1,500N. Analysis included stratifying results to normal mobile versus rigid degenerated intact motion segments.
RESULTS: The mean interbody height increase was 1.5mm for IPD reconstructed discs versus 3.0mm for fused segments. Axial compression stiffness was 3.0+/-0.9kN/mm for intact compared with 1.2+/-0.4kN/mm for IPD reconstructed segments. Reconstructed disc ROM was 9.0 degrees +/-3.7 degrees in flexion extension, 10.6 degrees +/-3.4 degrees in lateral bending, and 2.8 degrees +/-1.4 degrees in axial torsion that was similar to intact values and significantly greater than respective fusion values (p<.001). Mobile intact segments exhibited significantly greater rotation after fusion versus their more rigid counterparts (p<.05); however, intact motion was not related to motion after IPD reconstruction. The NZ and rotational stiffness followed similar trends. Differences in NZ between mobile and rigid intact specimens tended to decrease in the IPD reconstructed state.
CONCLUSION: The annulus-sparing IPD generally reproduced the intact segment biomechanics in terms of ROM, NZ, and stiffness. Furthermore, the IPD reconstructed discs imparted stability by maintaining a small neutral zone. The IPD reconstructed discs were significantly less rigid than the fusion constructs and may be an attractive alternative for the treatment of degenerative disc disease.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19540816      PMCID: PMC2730998          DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2009.04.026

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


  59 in total

1.  Requirements for an artificial intervertebral disc.

Authors:  M F Eijkelkamp; C C van Donkelaar; A G Veldhuizen; J R van Horn; J M Huyghe; G J Verkerke
Journal:  Int J Artif Organs       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 1.595

2.  General principles of total disc replacement arthroplasty: seventeen cases in a nonhuman primate model.

Authors:  Bryan W Cunningham; Anton E Dmitriev; Nianbin Hu; Paul C McAfee
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2003-10-15       Impact factor: 3.468

3.  Lumbar intradiscal pressure. Experimental studies on post-mortem material.

Authors:  A NACHEMSON
Journal:  Acta Orthop Scand Suppl       Date:  1960

4.  Mechanical properties of human lumbar spine motion segments. Influence of age, sex, disc level, and degeneration.

Authors:  A L Nachemson; A B Schultz; M H Berkson
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1979 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 3.468

5.  Intravital dynamic pressure measurements in lumbar discs. A study of common movements, maneuvers and exercises.

Authors:  A Nachemson; G Elfström
Journal:  Scand J Rehabil Med Suppl       Date:  1970

6.  Disc degeneration affects the multidirectional flexibility of the lumbar spine.

Authors:  M Mimura; M M Panjabi; T R Oxland; J J Crisco; I Yamamoto; A Vasavada
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1994-06-15       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  Biomechanical properties of human intervertebral discs subjected to axial dynamic compression. A comparison of lumbar and thoracic discs.

Authors:  W Koeller; W Meier; F Hartmann
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1984-10       Impact factor: 3.468

8.  Prevalence and distribution of spinal osteoarthritis in women.

Authors:  Patricia Ann Kramer
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2006-11-15       Impact factor: 3.468

9.  L5-S1 segment survivorship and clinical outcome analysis after L4-L5 isolated fusion.

Authors:  Gary Ghiselli; Jeffrey C Wang; Wellington K Hsu; Edgar G Dawson
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2003-06-15       Impact factor: 3.468

10.  Multidirectional testing of one- and two-level ProDisc-L versus simulated fusions.

Authors:  Manohar Panjabi; Gweneth Henderson; Celeste Abjornson; James Yue
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2007-05-20       Impact factor: 3.468

View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  Current strategies for treatment of intervertebral disc degeneration: substitution and regeneration possibilities.

Authors:  Sebastião van Uden; Joana Silva-Correia; Joaquim Miguel Oliveira; Rui Luís Reis
Journal:  Biomater Res       Date:  2017-10-23

Review 2.  Critical aspects and challenges for intervertebral disc repair and regeneration-Harnessing advances in tissue engineering.

Authors:  Conor T Buckley; Judith A Hoyland; Kengo Fujii; Abhay Pandit; James C Iatridis; Sibylle Grad
Journal:  JOR Spine       Date:  2018-07-30
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.