Literature DB >> 28374330

Timing of PMMA cement application for pedicle screw augmentation affects screw anchorage.

Werner Schmoelz1, Christian Heinz Heinrichs2, Sven Schmidt3, Angel R Piñera4, Felix Tome-Bermejo4, Javier M Duart4, Marlies Bauer5, Luis Álvarez Galovich4.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Cement augmentation is an established method to increase the pedicle screw (PS) anchorage in osteoporotic vertebral bodies. The ideal timing for augmentation when a reposition maneuver is necessary is controversial. While augmentation of the PS before reposition maneuver may increase the force applied it on the vertebrae, it bears the risk to impair PS anchorage, whereas augmenting the PS after the maneuver may restore this anchorage and prevent early screw loosening. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the effect of cement application timing on PS anchorage in the osteoporotic vertebral body.
METHODS: Ten lumbar vertebrae (L1-L5) were used for testing. The left and right pedicles of each vertebra were instrumented with the same PS size and used for pairwise comparison of the two timing points for augmentation. For the reposition maneuver, the left PS was loaded axially under displacement control (2 × ±2 mm, 3 × ±6 mm, 3 × ±10 mm) to simulate a reposition maneuver. Subsequently, both PS were augmented with 2 ml PMMA cement. The same force as measured during the left PS maneuver was applied to the previously augmented right hand side PS [2 × F (±2 mm), 3 × F (±6 mm), 3 × F (±10 mm)]. Both PS were cyclically loaded with initial forces of +50 and -50 N, while the lower force was increased by 5 N every 100 cycles until total failure of the PS. The PS motion was measured with a 3D motion analysis system. After cyclic loading stress, X-rays were taken to identify the PS loosening mechanism.
RESULTS: In comparison with PS augmented prior to the reposition maneuver, PS augmented after the reposition maneuver showed a significant higher number of load cycles until failure (5930 ± 1899 vs 3830 ± 1706, p = 0.015). The predominant loosening mechanism for PS augmented after the reposition maneuver was PS toggling with the attached cement cloud within the trabecular bone. While PS augmented prior to the reposition, maneuver showed a motion of the screw within the cement cloud.
CONCLUSION: The time of cement application has an effect on PS anchorage in the osteoporotic vertebral body if a reposition maneuver of the instrumented vertebrae is carried out. PS augmented after the reposition maneuver showed a significant higher number of load cycles until screw loosening.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Augmentation; Biomechanics; Osteoporosis; Pedicle screws; Polymethylmethacrylate; Reposition maneuver

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28374330     DOI: 10.1007/s00586-017-5053-3

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


  29 in total

1.  A comparative study on screw loosening in osteoporotic lumbar spine fusion between expandable and conventional pedicle screws.

Authors:  Zi-xiang Wu; Fu-tai Gong; Li Liu; Zhen-sheng Ma; Yang Zhang; Xiong Zhao; Min Yang; Wei Lei; Hong-xun Sang
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2011-12-07       Impact factor: 3.067

2.  Stability of pedicle screws after kyphoplasty augmentation: an experimental study to compare transpedicular screw fixation in soft and cured kyphoplasty cement.

Authors:  Oliver Linhardt; Christian Lüring; Jan Matussek; Corinna Hamberger; Wolfgang Plitz; Joachim Grifka
Journal:  J Spinal Disord Tech       Date:  2006-04

3.  Pullout performance comparison of novel expandable pedicle screw with expandable poly-ether-ether-ketone shells and cement-augmented pedicle screws.

Authors:  Mehmet Fatih Aycan; Tolga Tolunay; Teyfik Demir; Mesut Emre Yaman; Yusuf Usta
Journal:  Proc Inst Mech Eng H       Date:  2017-01-18       Impact factor: 1.617

4.  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

5.  Osteoporotic L1 burst fracture treated by short-segment percutaneous stabilization with cement-augmented screws and kyphoplasty (hybrid technique).

Authors:  Andreas Pingel; Frank Kandziora; Christoph-Heinrich Hoffmann
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  A method for the fatigue testing of pedicle screw fixation devices.

Authors:  V K Goel; J M Winterbottom; J N Weinstein
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  1994-11       Impact factor: 2.712

7.  Influence of load carrying on loads in internal spinal fixators.

Authors:  A Rohlmann; F Graichen; G Bergmann
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 2.712

Review 8.  The biomechanics of pedicle screw augmentation with cement.

Authors:  Benjamin D Elder; Sheng-Fu L Lo; Christina Holmes; Courtney R Goodwin; Thomas A Kosztowski; Ioan A Lina; John E Locke; Timothy F Witham
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2015-03-20       Impact factor: 4.166

Review 9.  Pedicle screw augmentation in osteoporotic spine: indications, limitations and technical aspects.

Authors:  S Hoppe; M J B Keel
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2016-12-19       Impact factor: 3.693

Review 10.  Osteoporosis in the European Union: medical management, epidemiology and economic burden. A report prepared in collaboration with the International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF) and the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industry Associations (EFPIA).

Authors:  E Hernlund; A Svedbom; M Ivergård; J Compston; C Cooper; J Stenmark; E V McCloskey; B Jönsson; J A Kanis
Journal:  Arch Osteoporos       Date:  2013-10-11       Impact factor: 2.617

View more
  6 in total

1.  Pedicle screw anchorage of carbon fiber-reinforced PEEK screws under cyclic loading.

Authors:  Richard A Lindtner; Rene Schmid; Thomas Nydegger; Marko Konschake; Werner Schmoelz
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2018-03-01       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Simplified Pedicle Subtraction Osteotomy for Osteoporotic Vertebral Fractures.

Authors:  Nicolas Plais; Charles Mengis; Jesús Manuel Gallego Bustos; Felix Tomé-Bermejo; Alejandro Peiro-Garcia; America Novoa Buitrago; Luis Alvarez-Galovich
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2021-09-22

3.  Technical Note: Pedicle Cement Augmentation with Proximal Screw Toggle and Loosening.

Authors:  Wen Jie Choy; William R Walsh; Kevin Phan; Ralph J Mobbs
Journal:  Orthop Surg       Date:  2019-06-09       Impact factor: 2.071

4.  Effect and potential risks of using multilevel cement-augmented pedicle screw fixation in osteoporotic spine with lumbar degenerative disease.

Authors:  Yong-Chao Tang; Hui-Zhi Guo; Dan-Qing Guo; Pei-Jie Luo; Yong-Xian Li; Guo-Ye Mo; Yan-Huai Ma; Jian-Cheng Peng; Shun-Cong Zhang
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2020-04-28       Impact factor: 2.362

5.  Release characteristics of enoxaparin sodium-loaded polymethylmethacrylate bone cement.

Authors:  Hui Sun; Xinzhe Ma; Zhiyong Li; Jianning Liu; Wei Wang; Xiangbei Qi
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2021-02-04       Impact factor: 2.359

6.  The Biomechanical Properties of Cement-Augmented Pedicle Screws for Osteoporotic Spines.

Authors:  Yuetian Wang; Lei Yang; Chunde Li; Haolin Sun
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2021-02-22
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.