Literature DB >> 25257136

Biomechanical comparison of sagittal-parallel versus non-parallel pedicle screw placement.

Mazda Farshad1, Nadja A Farshad-Amacker, Elias Bachmann, Jess G Snedeker, Samuel L Schmid.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: While convergent placement of pedicle screws in the axial plane is known to be more advantageous biomechanically, surgeons intuitively aim toward a parallel placement of screws in the sagittal plane. It is however not clear whether parallel placement of screws in the sagittal plane is biomechanically superior to a non-parallel construct. The hypothesis of this study is that sagittal non-parallel pedicle screws do not have an inferior initial pull-out strength compared to parallel placed screws.
METHODS: The established lumbar calf spine model was used for determination of pull-out strength in parallel and non-parallel intersegmental pedicle screw constructs. Each of six lumbar calf spines (L1-L6) was divided into three levels: L1/L2, L3/L4 and L5/L6. Each segment was randomly instrumented with pedicle screws (6/45 mm) with either the standard technique of sagittal parallel or non-parallel screw placement, respectively, under fluoroscopic control. CT was used to verify the intrapedicular positioning of all screws. The maximum pull-out forces and type of failure were registered and compared between the groups.
RESULTS: The pull-out forces were 5,394 N (range 4,221 N to 8,342 N) for the sagittal non-parallel screws and 5,263 N (range 3,589 N to 7,554 N) for the sagittal-parallel screws (p = 0.838). Interlevel comparisons also showed no statistically significant differences between the groups with no relevant difference in failure mode.
CONCLUSION: Non-parallel pedicle screws in the sagittal plane have at least equal initial fixation strength compared to parallel pedicle screws in the setting of the here performed cadaveric calf spine experiments.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25257136     DOI: 10.1007/s00701-014-2244-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Neurochir (Wien)        ISSN: 0001-6268            Impact factor:   2.216


  5 in total

1.  The contribution of the cortical shell to pedicle screw fixation.

Authors:  Matthew Henry Pelletier; Nicky Bertollo; Darweesh Al-Khawaja; William Robert Walsh
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2017-06

2.  Pull-out strength of patient-specific template-guided vs. free-hand fluoroscopically controlled thoracolumbar pedicle screws: a biomechanical analysis of a randomized cadaveric study.

Authors:  A Aichmair; M Moser; M R Bauer; E Bachmann; J G Snedeker; M Betz; M Farshad
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2017-03-04       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Novel pedicle screw and plate system provides superior stability in unilateral fixation for minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: an in vitro biomechanical study.

Authors:  Jie Li; Hong Xiao; Qingan Zhu; Yue Zhou; Changqing Li; Huan Liu; Zhiping Huang; Jin Shang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-03-25       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Risk Factors for Clinically Relevant Loosening of Percutaneous Pedicle Screws.

Authors:  Tetsuro Ohba; Shigeto Ebata; Hiroki Oba; Kensuke Koyama; Hirotaka Haro
Journal:  Spine Surg Relat Res       Date:  2018-08-25

5.  Biomechanical evaluation of a short-rod technique for lumbar fixation surgery.

Authors:  Ze-Bin Huang; Mao-Dan Nie; Ning-Ze Zhang; Shu Liu; Jia-Bin Yuan; Xu-Miao Lin; Cheng-Kung Cheng; Zhi-Cai Shi; Ning-Fang Mao
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2022-08-11
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.