Literature DB >> 24482703

Impact and clinical significance of pedicle length on spinal canal and intervertebral foramen area.

Chenxi Yuan1, Hai Zhu1, Dawei Song1, Wang Wei1, Ruofu Zhu1, Xin Mei1, Jun Zou1, Huilin Yang1.   

Abstract

The aim of this study was to measure changes in the cross-sectional area of the spinal canal and the area of the intervertebral foramen for each pedicle segment before and after the pedicle extension using computer-simulated transpedicular osteotomy to provide a theoretical basis for clinical decompression in the lumbar spinal canal. Using spiral CT scanning of the original lumbar spine, a finite element model was established. The pedicle was cut and extended by 2 mm, 4 mm, 6 mm, and 8 mm for respective modeling. The changes in the area of each plane of the vertebral canal and the area of the intervertebral foramen were measured. With the gradual extension of the pedicle, the areas of the spinal canal and intervertebral foramen also significantly increased compared with those of the original lumbar spine (P<0.05). The extension of the pedicle using transpedicular osteotomy can significantly increase the cross-sectional area of the lumbar canal and the area of the intervertebral foramen. This finding provides a new theoretically practicable method for the clinical decompression of the lumbar spinal canal.

Keywords:  Spinal stenosis; finite element method; osteotomy; pedicle length

Year:  2014        PMID: 24482703      PMCID: PMC3902255     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med        ISSN: 1940-5901


  20 in total

1.  Morphologic changes in the lumbar intervertebral foramen due to flexion-extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation: an in vitro anatomic and biomechanical study.

Authors:  A Fujiwara; H S An; T H Lim; V M Haughton
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2001-04-15       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  The effect of the X-Stop implantation on intervertebral foramen, segmental spinal canal length and disc space in elderly patients with lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  Zongmiao Wan; Shaobai Wang; Michal Kozanek; Qun Xia; Frederick L Mansfield; Guohua Lü; Kirkham B Wood; Guoan Li
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-09-21       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Postoperative outcome of lumbar spinal canal stenosis after fenestration: correlation with changes in intradural and extradural tube on magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  K Yamazaki; S Yoshida; T Ito; T Toba; S Kato; T Shimamura
Journal:  J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong)       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 1.118

4.  [Primary stenosis of the lumbar spinal canal in adults, a new syndrome].

Authors:  H VERBIEST
Journal:  Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd       Date:  1950-08-19

5.  Laminarthrectomy as a surgical approach for decompressing the spinal canal: assessment of preoperative versus postoperative dural sac cross-sectional areal (DSCSA).

Authors:  Erland Hermansen; Gunnar Moen; Johan Barstad; Rune Birketvedt; Kari Indrekvam
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2013-03-15       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  Correlation among canal compromise, neurologic deficit, and injury severity in thoracolumbar burst fractures.

Authors:  Robert Meves; Osmar Avanzi
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2006-08-15       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 7.  X-STOP surgical implant for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis: clinical practice recommendations for neurosurgical nurse practitioners.

Authors:  Magan Nielsen
Journal:  J Neurosci Nurs       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 1.230

8.  The significance of thoracolumbar spinal canal size in spinal cord injury patients.

Authors:  A R Vaccaro; R S Nachwalter; G R Klein; J M Sewards; T J Albert; S R Garfin
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2001-02-15       Impact factor: 3.468

9.  Cross-sectional area of the stenotic lumbar dural tube measured from the transverse views of magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  C Hamanishi; N Matukura; M Fujita; M Tomihara; S Tanaka
Journal:  J Spinal Disord       Date:  1994-10

10.  Axial loading of the spine during CT and MR in patients with suspected lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  B I Danielson; J Willén; A Gaulitz; T Niklason; T H Hansson
Journal:  Acta Radiol       Date:  1998-11       Impact factor: 1.990

View more
  7 in total

1.  Study on different surgical approaches for acute Lumber disk protrusion combined with Cauda Equina Syndrome.

Authors:  Lianbing Shen; Liangqin Fang; Yihua Qiu; Shunming Xing; Dechun Chen; Xiang He; Jinxin Wang; Jing Lai; Guohua Shi; Jiefeng Zhang; Teng Liao; Junming Tan
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Pathol       Date:  2014-12-01

2.  Target radiofrequency combined with collagenase chemonucleolysis in the treatment of lumbar intervertebral disc herniation.

Authors:  Daying Zhang; Yong Zhang; Zhijian Wang; Xuexue Zhang; Mulan Sheng
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2015-01-15

3.  Evaluation of the influence of pedicle-lengthening osteotomy on lumbar stability.

Authors:  Maofeng Gao; Jun Zou; Zhigang Zhang; Zongping Luo; Huilin Yang
Journal:  Am J Transl Res       Date:  2016-05-15       Impact factor: 4.060

4.  A minimally invasive posterior lumbar interbody fusion using percutaneous long arm pedicle screw system for degenerative lumbar disease.

Authors:  Er-Xing He; Ji-Hao Cui; Zhi-Xun Yin; Chuang Li; Cheng Tang; Yi-Qian He; Cheng-Wei Liu
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2014-11-15

5.  Diagnosis efficiency for pulmonary embolism using magnetic resonance imaging method: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Kuitao Yue
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2015-08-15

6.  Impact of pedicle-lengthening osteotomy on spinal canal volume and neural foramen size in three types of lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  P Li; L Qian; W D Wu; C F Wu; J Ouyang
Journal:  Bone Joint Res       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 5.853

7.  Pedicle distraction increases intervertebral and spinal canal area in a cadaver and bone model.

Authors:  Matthew Hughes; Nikolaos Papadakos; Tim Bishop; Jason Bernard
Journal:  SICOT J       Date:  2018-05-04
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.