Literature DB >> 21279503

[Effect of lumbar hybrid instrumentation and rigid fusion on the treated and the adjacent segments. A biomechanical study].

B Wiedenhöfer1, M Akbar, C H Fürstenberg, C Carstens, S Hemmer, C Schilling.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Degeneration of the upper adjacent segment after operative treatment of degenerative spinal diseases of the lumbar spine (degenerative disc disease DDD) is an unsolved problem. There is also no consensus on whether a rigid or dynamic treatment of DDD should be carried out to protect the segments. This study was carried out to evaluate the effect of bisegmental rigid 360° fusion and bisegmental hybrid fusion on the treated segment as well as on the upper adjacent segment under the aspect of segment protection.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of six human spinal column preparations (L2-5) were tested under native conditions (NAT), with bisegmental rigid fusion (RIG 360°) and with hybrid fusion (Hybrid) in all three movement directions under physical load and with an preload. The range of motion (ROM) and neutral zone (NZ) were evaluated. The intradiscal pressure (IDP) was measured in the upper adjacent segment (OAS).
RESULTS: The RIG 360° led to a significant reduction in movement in all directions compared to NAT but Hybrid only in lateral bending (LB). In the OAS the NZ was showed a much greater increase than the ROM. The RIG 360° showed an increase of the NZ in flexion-extension of 86.8% and in LB of 49.6% as well as a significant increase in axial rotation of 52.5%. The increase in the Hybrid was not significant compared to NAT in all directions. Pressure measurements in OAS showed no significant differences for RIG 360° and for Hybrid compared to NAT for both load scenarios. DISCUSSION: The range of motion of the treated segments for Hybrid were close to NAT in comparison to RIG 360° indicating a segment-protective effect. The hypothesis that rigid fusion has a significant effect on intersegmental mobility and the increase in intradiscal pressure in the upper adjacent segment could not be confirmed. The data indicate that the primary effect of fusion on the adjacent segment is very low but the fusion-linked increased frequency of extreme loads of the OAS falling within the significance level leads to degeneration. Even if the NZ values for Hybrid and RIG 360° do not significantly differ from NAT, the NZ alterations between the instrumentations tend to be strongly shifted in favor of Hybrid.
CONCLUSIONS: The data confirm that the clear and sometimes significant alterations of the NZ can be an essential factor for development of adjacent segment degeneration. A dynamic conclusion of instrumentation in the sense of a topping-off would appear to be useful if pathoanatomical indications for an intervertebral disc prosthesis are present.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21279503     DOI: 10.1007/s00132-010-1717-y

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


  42 in total

1.  Adjacent segment degeneration after lumbar spinal posterolateral fusion with instrumentation in elderly patients.

Authors:  Wen-Ying Chou; Chien-Jen Hsu; Wei-Ning Chang; Chi-Yin Wong
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 3.067

2.  The acute effects of posterior fusion instrumentation on kinematics and intradiscal pressure of the human lumbar spine.

Authors:  Fred J Molz; Jason I Partin; John S Kirkpatrick
Journal:  J Spinal Disord Tech       Date:  2003-04

3.  The effects of an interspinous implant on intervertebral disc pressures.

Authors:  Kyle E Swanson; Derek P Lindsey; Ken Y Hsu; James F Zucherman; Scott A Yerby
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2003-01-01       Impact factor: 3.468

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

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

5.  Effects of charité artificial disc on the implanted and adjacent spinal segments mechanics using a hybrid testing protocol.

Authors:  Vijay K Goel; Jonathan N Grauer; Tushar Ch Patel; Ashok Biyani; Koichi Sairyo; Srilakshmi Vishnubhotla; Aaron Matyas; Ian Cowgill; Miranda Shaw; Rebecca Long; David Dick; Manohar M Panjabi; Hassan Serhan
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2005-12-15       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  The spinal lax zone and neutral zone: measurement techniques and parameter comparisons.

Authors:  N R Crawford; J D Peles; C A Dickman
Journal:  J Spinal Disord       Date:  1998-10

7.  Intradiscal pressure measurements above an instrumented fusion. A cadaveric study.

Authors:  S L Weinhoffer; R D Guyer; M Herbert; S L Griffith
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1995-03-01       Impact factor: 3.468

8.  A universal spine tester for in vitro experiments with muscle force simulation.

Authors:  H J Wilke; L Claes; H Schmitt; S Wolf
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  Lumbosacral spinal fusion. A biomechanical study.

Authors:  C K Lee; N A Langrana
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1984-09       Impact factor: 3.468

10.  Operative treatment of the degenerated segment adjacent to a lumbar fusion.

Authors:  T S Whitecloud; J M Davis; P M Olive
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1994-03-01       Impact factor: 3.468

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.