Literature DB >> 20523969

[Pedicle screw augmentation from a biomechanical perspective].

V Bullmann1, U R Liljenqvist, R Rödl, T L Schulte.   

Abstract

Severe osteoporosis is a serious problem in the instrumentation during spine surgery. Besides kyphosis, adjacent vertebral fractures and of course pedicle screw loosening and implant pullout are frequent challenges in instrumentation of the osteoporotic spine. In addition to screw diameter and length, bone mineral density has the most important impact on the stability of a pedicle screw. In cases of severe osteoporosis cement augmentation increases the stability of a pedicle screw. Pullout force can be increased with augmentation by 96-278%. Nowadays, there are two different procedures for augmentation: cement augmentation of the vertebra before inserting the screw into the soft, fresh cement or augmentation via a perforated screw that has already been inserted.The main problem in augmentation techniques are cement leakages. In both techniques leakages may occur. The problem of leakages seems to be less severe in the augmentation technique via the perforated screw, because cement application can be stopped immediately if the onset of leakage is noticed. Even surgical revision of cement augmented screws is not a major clinical problem based on recent biomechanical studies. The revision screw can be chosen 1 mm thicker and can be cement augmented again without technical problems.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20523969     DOI: 10.1007/s00132-010-1602-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Orthopade        ISSN: 0085-4530            Impact factor:   1.087


  32 in total

1.  Axial and tangential fixation strength of pedicle screws versus hooks in the thoracic spine in relation to bone mineral density.

Authors:  Lars Hackenberg; Thomas Link; Ulf Liljenqvist
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2002-05-01       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  Pedicle screw fixation strength: pullout versus insertional torque.

Authors:  Serkan Inceoglu; Lisa Ferrara; Robert F McLain
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2004 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 4.166

3.  The effect of cement augmentation and extension of posterior instrumentation on stabilization and adjacent level effects in the elderly spine.

Authors:  Juay-Seng Tan; Sandeep Singh; Qing-An Zhu; Marcel F Dvorak; Charles G Fisher; Thomas R Oxland
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2008-12-01       Impact factor: 3.468

4.  Revision pedicle screws. Bigger, longer shims--what is best?

Authors:  D W Polly; J R Orchowski; R G Ellenbogen
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1998-06-15       Impact factor: 3.468

5.  The role of imaging and in situ biomechanical testing in assessing pedicle screw pull-out strength.

Authors:  B S Myers; P J Belmont; W J Richardson; J R Yu; K D Harper; R W Nightingale
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1996-09-01       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  Efficacy of novel-concept pedicle screw fixation augmented with calcium phosphate cement in the osteoporotic spine.

Authors:  Masaya Yazu; Akihiro Kin; Riya Kosaka; Mitsuo Kinoshita; Muneaki Abe
Journal:  J Orthop Sci       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 1.601

7.  An injectable cementing screw for fixation in osteoporotic bone.

Authors:  B E McKoy; Y H An
Journal:  J Biomed Mater Res       Date:  2000

8.  Stability of transpedicle screwing for the osteoporotic spine. An in vitro study of the mechanical stability.

Authors:  K Okuyama; K Sato; E Abe; H Inaba; Y Shimada; H Murai
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1993-11       Impact factor: 3.468

9.  Use of the anatomic trajectory for thoracic pedicle screw salvage after failure/violation using the straight-forward technique: a biomechanical analysis.

Authors:  Ronald A Lehman; Timothy R Kuklo
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2003-09-15       Impact factor: 3.468

10.  Effect of screw diameter, insertion technique, and bone cement augmentation of pedicular screw fixation strength.

Authors:  R H Wittenberg; K S Lee; M Shea; A A White; W C Hayes
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1993-11       Impact factor: 4.176

View more
  13 in total

1.  The cement leakage in cement-augmented pedicle screw instrumentation in degenerative lumbosacral diseases: a retrospective analysis of 202 cases and 950 augmented pedicle screws.

Authors:  Hui-Zhi Guo; Yong-Chao Tang; Dan-Qing Guo; Shun-Cong Zhang; Yong-Xian Li; Guo-Ye Mo; Pei-Jie Luo; Ten-Peng Zhou; Yan-Huai Ma; Xiao-Bing Jiang
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2019-04-27       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Cement-augmented screws in a cervical two-level corpectomy with anterior titanium mesh cage reconstruction: a biomechanical study.

Authors:  Sebastian Hartmann; Claudius Thomé; Anja Tschugg; Johannes Paesold; Pujan Kavakebi; Werner Schmölz
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2017-01-21       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Pulmonary cement embolism following cement-augmented fenestrated pedicle screw fixation in adult spinal deformity patients with severe osteoporosis (analysis of 2978 fenestrated screws).

Authors:  Onur Levent Ulusoy; Sinan Kahraman; Isik Karalok; Emel Kaya; Meric Enercan; Cem Sever; Burak Abay; Selhan Karadereler; Azmi Hamzaoglu
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2018-04-18       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  Different pedicle osteosynthesis for thoracolumbar vertebral fractures in elderly patients.

Authors:  Massimo Girardo; Alessandro Rava; Federico Fusini; Giosuè Gargiulo; Angela Coniglio; Pasquale Cinnella
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2018-05-14       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Reduced loosening rate and loss of correction following posterior stabilization with or without PMMA augmentation of pedicle screws in vertebral fractures in the elderly.

Authors:  A El Saman; S Meier; A Sander; A Kelm; I Marzi; H Laurer
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2013-07-04       Impact factor: 3.693

6.  Intraoperative PEEP-ventilation during PMMA-injection for augmented pedicle screws: improvement of leakage rate in spinal surgery.

Authors:  A El Saman; A Kelm; S Meier; A L Sander; K Eichler; I Marzi; H Laurer
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2013-08-20       Impact factor: 3.693

7.  Comparison of three different screw trajectories in osteoporotic vertebrae: a biomechanical investigation.

Authors:  J-S Jarvers; S Schleifenbaum; C Pfeifle; C Oefner; M Edel; N von der Höh; C-E Heyde
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2021-05-05       Impact factor: 2.362

8.  A Biomechanical Comparison of Expansive Pedicle Screws for Severe Osteoporosis: The Effects of Screw Design and Cement Augmentation.

Authors:  Ching-Lung Tai; Tsung-Ting Tsai; Po-Liang Lai; Yi-Lu Chen; Mu-Yi Liu; Lih-Huei Chen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-12-31       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Biomechanical Comparison of Pull-out Strength of Different Cementation and Pedicle Screw Placement Techniques in a Calf Spine Model.

Authors:  Turgut Akgül; Murat Korkmaz; Tuna Pehlivanoglu; Serkan Bayram; Mustafa Abdullah Özdemir; Şahin Karalar
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2020-07-20       Impact factor: 1.251

10.  Pull-out strength of cemented solid versus fenestrated pedicle screws in osteoporotic vertebrae.

Authors:  C I Leichtle; A Lorenz; S Rothstock; J Happel; F Walter; T Shiozawa; U G Leichtle
Journal:  Bone Joint Res       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 5.853

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.