Literature DB >> 25559294

Characterization of the behavior of a novel low-stiffness posterior spinal implant under anterior shear loading on a degenerative spinal model.

Angela D Melnyk1, Jason D Chak, Vaneet Singh, Adrienne Kelly, Peter A Cripton, Charles G Fisher, Marcel F Dvorak, Thomas R Oxland.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Dynamic implants have been developed to address potential adjacent level effects due to rigid instrumentation. Rates of revision surgeries may be reduced by using improved implants in the primary surgery. Prior to clinical use, implants should be rigorously tested ex vivo. The objective of our study was to characterize the load-sharing and kinematic behavior of a novel low-stiffness spinal implant.
METHODS: A human cadaveric model of degenerative spondylolisthesis was tested in shear. Lumbar functional spinal units (N = 15) were tested under a static 300 N axial compression force and a cyclic anterior shear force (5-250 N). Translation was tracked with a motion capture system. A novel implant was compared to three standard implants with shear stiffness ranging from low to high. All implants were instrumented with strain gauges to measure the supported shear force. Each implant was affixed to each specimen, and the specimens were tested intact and in two progressively destabilized states.
RESULTS: Specimen condition and implant type affected implant load-sharing and specimen translation (p < 0.0001). Implant load-sharing increased across all degeneration-simulating specimen conditions and decreased across the three standard implants (high- to low-stiffness). Translation increased with the three standard implants (trend). The novel implant behaved similarly to the medium-stiffness implant (p > 0.2).
CONCLUSIONS: The novel implant behaved similarly to the medium-stiffness implant in both load-sharing and translation despite having a different design and stiffness. Complex implant design and specimen-implant interaction necessitate pre-clinical testing of novel implants. Further in vitro testing in axial rotation and flexion-extension is recommended as they are highly relevant loading directions for non-rigid implants.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25559294     DOI: 10.1007/s00586-014-3735-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Spine J        ISSN: 0940-6719            Impact factor:   3.134


  28 in total

1.  Load-sharing characteristics of stabilized lumbar spine segments.

Authors:  P A Cripton; G M Jain; R H Wittenberg; L P Nolte
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2000-01-15       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  Posterior lumbar fusion by peek rods in degenerative spine: preliminary report on 30 cases.

Authors:  F De Iure; G Bosco; M Cappuccio; S Paderni; L Amendola
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-03-09       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Biomechanical characterization of the three-dimensional kinematic behaviour of the Dynesys dynamic stabilization system: an in vitro study.

Authors:  Christina A Niosi; Qingan A Zhu; Derek C Wilson; Ory Keynan; David R Wilson; Thomas R Oxland
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2005-10-11       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  In vitro fixator rod loading after transforaminal compared to anterior lumbar interbody fusion.

Authors:  A Kettler; T Niemeyer; L Issler; U Merk; M Mahalingam; K Werner; L Claes; H-J Wilke
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  2006-01-27       Impact factor: 2.063

5.  Biomechanical evaluation of a dynamic pedicle screw fixation device.

Authors:  Hua-Zi Xu; Xiang-Yang Wang; Yong-Long Chi; Qing-An Zhu; Yan Lin; Qi-Shan Huang; Li-Yang Dai
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  2006-01-24       Impact factor: 2.063

6.  Comparison of the load-sharing characteristics between pedicle-based dynamic and rigid rod devices.

Authors:  Yoon-Ho Ahn; Wen-Ming Chen; Kwon-Yong Lee; Kyung-Woo Park; Sung-Jae Lee
Journal:  Biomed Mater       Date:  2008-11-25       Impact factor: 3.715

7.  Which axial and bending stiffnesses of posterior implants are required to design a flexible lumbar stabilization system?

Authors:  Hendrik Schmidt; Frank Heuer; Hans-Joachim Wilke
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2008-11-26       Impact factor: 2.712

8.  Radiographic analysis of newly developed degenerative spondylolisthesis in a mean twelve-year prospective study.

Authors:  Kiyoshi Aono; Tetsuya Kobayashi; Shizuo Jimbo; Yuji Atsuta; Takeo Matsuno
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2010-04-15       Impact factor: 3.468

9.  Immediate biomechanical effects of lumbar posterior dynamic stabilization above a circumferential fusion.

Authors:  Boyle C Cheng; Jeff Gordon; Joseph Cheng; William C Welch
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2007-11-01       Impact factor: 3.468

10.  The effects of an interspinous implant on the kinematics of the instrumented and adjacent levels in the lumbar spine.

Authors:  Derek P Lindsey; Kyle E Swanson; Paul Fuchs; Ken Y Hsu; James F Zucherman; Scott A Yerby
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2003-10-01       Impact factor: 3.468

View more
  2 in total

1.  A pedicle screw system and a lamina hook system provide similar primary and long-term stability: a biomechanical in vitro study with quasi-static and dynamic loading conditions.

Authors:  Hans-Joachim Wilke; Dominik Kaiser; David Volkheimer; Carsten Hackenbroch; Klaus Püschel; Michael Rauschmann
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-07-12       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Is it possible to preserve lumbar lordosis after hybrid stabilization? Preliminary results of a novel rigid-dynamic stabilization system in degenerative lumbar pathologies.

Authors:  Matteo Formica; Luca Cavagnaro; Marco Basso; Andrea Zanirato; Lamberto Felli; Carlo Formica
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-10-05       Impact factor: 3.134

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.