Literature DB >> 24979274

Biomechanical stability of lateral interbody implants and supplemental fixation in a cadaveric degenerative spondylolisthesis model.

Guy R Fogel1, Alexander W L Turner, Zachary A Dooley, G Bryan Cornwall.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: In vitro cadaveric biomechanical study of lateral interbody cages and supplemental fixation in a degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS) model.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate changes in shear and flexion-extension stability of lateral interbody fusion constructs. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Instability associated with DS may increase postoperative treatment complications. Several groups have investigated DS in cadaveric spines. Extreme lateral interbody fusion (XLIF) cages with supplemental fixation have not previously been examined using a DS model.
METHODS: Seven human cadaveric L4-L5 motion segments were evaluated using flexion-extension moments to ±7.5 N·m and anterior-posterior (A-P) shear loading of 150 N with a static axial compressive load of 300 N. Conditions were: (1) intact segment, (2) DS simulation with facet resection and lateral discectomy, (3) standalone XLIF cage, (4) XLIF cage with (1) lateral plate, (2) lateral plate and unilateral pedicle screws contralateral to the plate (PS), (3) unilateral PS, (4) bilateral PS, (5) spinous process plate, and (6) lateral plate and spinous process plate. Flexion-extension range of motion (ROM) data were compared between conditions and with results from a previous study without DS simulation. A-P shear displacements were compared between conditions.
RESULTS: Flexion-extension ROM after DS destabilization increased significantly by 181% of intact ROM. With the XLIF cage alone, ROM decreased to 77% of intact. All conditions were less stable than corresponding conditions with intact posterior elements except those including the spinous process plate. Under shear loading, A-P displacement with the XLIF cage alone increased by 2.2 times intact. Bilateral PS provided the largest reduction of A-P displacement, whereas the spinous process plate alone provided the least.
CONCLUSION: This is the first in vitro shear load testing of XLIF cages with supplemental fixation in a cadaveric DS model. The variability in sagittal plane construct stability, including significantly increased flexion-extension ROM found with most fixation conditions including bilateral PS may explain some clinical treatment complications in DS with residual instability. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: N/A.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24979274     DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000485

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


  12 in total

1.  The choice of supplemental fixation in lateral interbody fusion: video lecture.

Authors:  Antoine G Tohmeh
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 2.  MIS lateral spine surgery: a systematic literature review of complications, outcomes, and economics.

Authors:  Jeff A Lehmen; Edward J Gerber
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-04-08       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Importance of the epiphyseal ring in OLIF stand-alone surgery: a biomechanical study on cadaveric spines.

Authors:  Xuyang Zhang; Hao Wu; Yilei Chen; Junhui Liu; Jian Chen; Teng Zhang; ZhaoFeng Zhou; Shunwu Fan; Patricia Dolan; Michael Anthony Adams; Fengdong Zhao
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2020-11-23       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 4.  Interbody Fusion Techniques in the Surgical Management of Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis.

Authors:  Peter B Derman; Todd J Albert
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2017-12

5.  Biomechanical evaluation of interbody fixation with secondary augmentation: lateral lumbar interbody fusion versus posterior lumbar interbody fusion.

Authors:  Jakub Godzik; Samuel Kalb; Marco T Reis; Phillip M Reyes; Vaneet Singh; Anna G U S Newcomb; Steve W Chang; Brian P Kelly; Neil R Crawford
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2018-06

6.  Anterior and Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion With Supplemental Interspinous Process Fixation: Outcomes from a Multicenter, Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Study.

Authors:  Ripul Panchal; Ryan Denhaese; Clint Hill; K Brandon Strenge; Alexandre DE Moura; Peter Passias; Paul Arnold; Andrew Cappuccino; M David Dennis; Andy Kranenburg; Brieta Ventimiglia; Kim Martin; Chris Ferry; Sarah Martineck; Camille Moore; Kee Kim
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2018-08-03

7.  Extreme lateral lumbar interbody fusion: Do the cons outweigh the pros?

Authors:  Nancy E Epstein
Journal:  Surg Neurol Int       Date:  2016-09-22

8.  Biomechanical comparison of multilevel lateral interbody fusion with and without supplementary instrumentation: a three-dimensional finite element study.

Authors:  Xilin Liu; Jun Ma; Paul Park; Xiaodong Huang; Ning Xie; Xiaojian Ye
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2017-02-02       Impact factor: 2.362

9.  Adjustable Rigid Interspinous Process Fixation: A Biomechanical Study of Segmental Lordosis and Interbody Loading in the Lumbar Spine.

Authors:  Anup Gandhi; Chris Ferry; Jason A Inzana; Steve W Chang; Ryan DenHaese
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2019-03-25

10.  Clinical and radiographic analysis of unilateral versus bilateral instrumented one-level lateral lumbar interbody fusion.

Authors:  Masayoshi Fukushima; Yasushi Oshima; Yohei Yuzawa; Sakae Tanaka; Hirohiko Inanami
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-02-20       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.