Literature DB >> 20375770

Augmentation improves human cadaveric vertebral body compression mechanics for lumbar total disc replacement.

Jonathon H Yoder1, Joshua D Auerbach, Philip M Maurer, Erik M Erbe, Dean Entrekin, Richard A Balderston, Rudolf Bertagnoli, Dawn M Elliott.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: Cadaveric biomechanical study.
OBJECTIVE: To quantify the effects of vertebral body augmentation on biomechanics under axial compression by a total disc replacement (TDR) implant. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: TDR is a surgical alternative to lumbar spinal fusion to treat degenerative disc disease. Osteoporosis in the adjacent vertebrae to the interposed TDR may lead to implant subsidence or vertebral body fracture. Vertebral augmentation is used to treat osteoporotic compression fracture. This study sought to evaluate whether vertebral augmentation improves biomechanics under TDR axial loading.
METHODS: Forty-five L1-L5 lumbar vertebral body segments with intact posterior elements were used. Peripheral quantitative computed tomography scans were performed to determine bone density, and specimens were block-randomized by bone density into augmentation and control groups. A semiconstrained keeled lumbar disc replacement device was implanted, providing 50% endplate coverage. Vertebral augmentation of 17.6% +/- 0.9% vertebral volume fill with Cortoss was performed on the augmentation group. All segments underwent axial compression at a rate of 0.2 mm/s to 6 mm.
RESULTS: The load-displacement response for all specimens was nonlinear. Subfailure mechanical properties with augmentation were significantly different from control; in all cases, the augmented group was 2 times higher than control. At failure, the maximum load and stiffness with augmentation was not significantly different from control. The maximum apparent stress and modulus with augmentation were 2 times and 1.3 times greater than control, respectively. The subfailure stress and apparent modulus with augmentation were moderately correlated with bone density whereas the control subfailure properties were not. The augmented maximum stress was not correlated with bone density, whereas the control was weakly correlated. The maximum apparent modulus was moderately correlated with bone density for both the augmented and the control groups.
CONCLUSION: Augmentation improved the mechanical properties of the lumbar vertebral body for compression by a TDR implant.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20375770      PMCID: PMC3413267          DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181cf7055

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


  46 in total

1.  Effect of implant design and endplate preparation on the compressive strength of interbody fusion constructs.

Authors:  T Steffen; A Tsantrizos; M Aebi
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2000-05-01       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  Analysis of titanium mesh cages in adults with minimum two-year follow-up.

Authors:  K R Eck; K H Bridwell; F F Ungacta; M A Lapp; L G Lenke; K D Riew
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2000-09-15       Impact factor: 3.468

3.  An experimental study on the interface strength between titanium mesh cage and vertebra in reference to vertebral bone mineral density.

Authors:  K Hasegawa; M Abe; T Washio; T Hara
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2001-04-15       Impact factor: 3.468

4.  Effects of endplate removal on the structural properties of the lower lumbar vertebral bodies.

Authors:  Thomas R Oxland; J Pamela Grant; Marcel F Dvorak; Charles G Fisher
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2003-04-15       Impact factor: 3.468

5.  Comparison of a new bisphenol-a-glycidyl dimethacrylate-based cortical bone void filler with polymethyl methacrylate.

Authors:  E M Erbe; T D Clineff; G Gualtieri
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  Effects of bone cement volume and distribution on vertebral stiffness after vertebroplasty.

Authors:  M A Liebschner; W S Rosenberg; T M Keaveny
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2001-07-15       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  Human lumbar vertebrae. Quantitative three-dimensional anatomy.

Authors:  M M Panjabi; V Goel; T Oxland; K Takata; J Duranceau; M Krag; M Price
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1992-03       Impact factor: 3.468

8.  Augmentation of (pedicle) screws with calcium apatite cement in patients with severe progressive osteoporotic spinal deformities: an innovative technique.

Authors:  P I Wuisman; M Van Dijk; H Staal; B J Van Royen
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  Percutaneous vertebroplasty for pain relief and spinal stabilization.

Authors:  J D Barr; M S Barr; T J Lemley; R M McCann
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2000-04-15       Impact factor: 3.468

10.  Adjacent vertebral failure after vertebroplasty. A biomechanical investigation.

Authors:  U Berlemann; S J Ferguson; L P Nolte; P F Heini
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2002-07
View more
  1 in total

1.  We Need to Talk about Lumbar Total Disc Replacement.

Authors:  Stephen Beatty
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2018-08-03
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.