BACKGROUND: Pseudoarthrosis after pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO) can require revision surgery due to posterior rod failure, and the stiffness of these revision constructs has not been quantified. OBJECTIVE: To compare the multidirectional bending stiffness of 7 revision strategies following rod failure. METHODS: Seven fresh-frozen human spines (T11-pelvis) were tested as follows: (1) posterior instrumentation from T12-S1 (excluding L3) with iliac fixation and L3 PSO; (2) inline connectors after rod breakage at L3 (L2 screws removed for access); (3) cross-links connecting rods above and below inline connectors; satellite rods (4) parallel, (5) 45° anterior, and (6) 45° posterior to original rods; 45° posterior with cross-links connecting (7) original and (8) satellite rods. Groups 3 to 8 were tested in random order. Nondestructive pure moment flexion-extension (FE), lateral bending (LB), and axial rotation (AR) tests were conducted to 7.5 Nm; 3D motion tracking monitored the primary range of motion. RESULTS: Addition of inline connectors alone restored stiffness in FE and LB (P > .05), but not in AR (P < .05). Satellite rods (groups 4 to 6) restored stiffness in FE and LB (P > .05), but not in AR (P < .05) and were not significantly different from one another (P > .05). The addition of cross-links (groups 3, 7, and 8) restored stiffness in all bending modes (P > .05) and were significantly greater than inline connectors alone in AR (P < .05). CONCLUSION: The results suggest that these revision strategies can restore stiffness without entire rod replacement. Failure of AR stiffness restoration can be mitigated with cross-links. The positioning of the satellite rods is not an important factor in strengthening the revision.
BACKGROUND:Pseudoarthrosis after pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO) can require revision surgery due to posterior rod failure, and the stiffness of these revision constructs has not been quantified. OBJECTIVE: To compare the multidirectional bending stiffness of 7 revision strategies following rod failure. METHODS: Seven fresh-frozen human spines (T11-pelvis) were tested as follows: (1) posterior instrumentation from T12-S1 (excluding L3) with iliac fixation and L3 PSO; (2) inline connectors after rod breakage at L3 (L2 screws removed for access); (3) cross-links connecting rods above and below inline connectors; satellite rods (4) parallel, (5) 45° anterior, and (6) 45° posterior to original rods; 45° posterior with cross-links connecting (7) original and (8) satellite rods. Groups 3 to 8 were tested in random order. Nondestructive pure moment flexion-extension (FE), lateral bending (LB), and axial rotation (AR) tests were conducted to 7.5 Nm; 3D motion tracking monitored the primary range of motion. RESULTS: Addition of inline connectors alone restored stiffness in FE and LB (P > .05), but not in AR (P < .05). Satellite rods (groups 4 to 6) restored stiffness in FE and LB (P > .05), but not in AR (P < .05) and were not significantly different from one another (P > .05). The addition of cross-links (groups 3, 7, and 8) restored stiffness in all bending modes (P > .05) and were significantly greater than inline connectors alone in AR (P < .05). CONCLUSION: The results suggest that these revision strategies can restore stiffness without entire rod replacement. Failure of AR stiffness restoration can be mitigated with cross-links. The positioning of the satellite rods is not an important factor in strengthening the revision.
Authors: Benny T Dahl; Jonathan A Harris; Manasa Gudipally; Mark Moldavsky; Saif Khalil; Brandon S Bucklen Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2017-08-02 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: Manuel Fernandes Marques; Vincent Fiere; Ibrahim Obeid; Yann-Philippe Charles; Khaled El-Youssef; Abi Lahoud; Joe Faddoul; Emmanuelle Ferrero; Guillaume Riouallon; Clément Silvestre; Jean-Charles Le Huec; David Kieser; Louis Boissiere Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2021-05-05 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: Luigi La Barbera; Marco Brayda-Bruno; Christian Liebsch; Tomaso Villa; Andrea Luca; Fabio Galbusera; Hans-Joachim Wilke Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2018-05-08 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: Luigi La Barbera; Hans-Joachim Wilke; Maria Luisa Ruspi; Marco Palanca; Christian Liebsch; Andrea Luca; Marco Brayda-Bruno; Fabio Galbusera; Luca Cristofolini Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-02-11 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Anouar Bourghli; Louis Boissière; David Kieser; Daniel Larrieu; Javier Pizones; Ahmet Alanay; Ferran Pellise; Franck Kleinstück; Ibrahim Obeid Journal: Neurospine Date: 2021-10-21