| Literature DB >> 29089564 |
Yin Liu1, Na Li1, Wei Wei2, Jing Deng3, Yuequn Hu1, Bin Ye1, Wei Wang4.
Abstract
While cervical lordosis alteration is not uncommon after anterior cervical arthrodesis, its influence on radiological adjacent segment pathology (RASP) is still unclear. Biomechanical changes induced by arthrodesis may contribute to ASP onset. To investigate the correlation between cervical lordosis decrease and RASP onset after anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF) and to determine its biomechanical effect on adjacent segments after surgery, 80 CSM patients treated with ACCF were retrospectively studied, and a baseline finite element model of the cervical spine as well as post-operation models with normal and decreased lordosis were established and validated. We found that post-operative lordosis decrease was prognostic in predicting RASP onset, with the hazard ratio of 0.45. In the FE models, ROM at the adjacent segment increased after surgery, and the increase was greater in the model with decreased lordosis. Thus, post-operative cervical lordosis change significantly correlated with RASP occurrence, and it may be of prognostic value. The biomechanical changes induced by lordosis change at the adjacent segments after corpectomy may be one of the mechanisms for this phenomenon. Restoring a well lordotic cervical spine after corpectomy may reduce RASP occurrence and be beneficial to long-term surgical outcomes.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29089564 PMCID: PMC5663916 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-14300-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Demographic and Clinical Information of Patients in RASP and Non-RASP groups.
| Age | RASP group (n = 37) | Non-RASP group (n = 43) | P value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 50.3 ± 9.3 | 51.0 ± 8.7 | 0.87 | |
| Gender(male) | 18 | 19 | 0.69 |
| Corpectomy | |||
| C4 | 2 | 5 | 0.55 |
| C5 | 17 | 18 | 0.71 |
| C6 | 13 | 12 | 0.48 |
| C4-5 | 2 | 3 | 0.86 |
| C5-6 | 3 | 5 | 0.88 |
| Follow-up period(month) | 36.8 ± 20.7 | 23.7 ± 12.9 | <0.01 |
| Pre-operative JOA score | 10.8 ± 3.1 | 10.7 ± 2.9 | 0.82 |
| Post-operative JOA score | 14.3 ± 2.4* | 14.4 ± 2.5* | 0.91 |
| Follow-up JOA score | 13.9 ± 2.3** | 14.6 ± 2.7** | 0.23 |
| Post-operative RR(%) | 60.3 ± 29.8 | 61.6 ± 25.3 | 0.83 |
*P < 0.05 comparing to pre-operative JOA score.
**P < 0.05 comparing to post-operative JOA score.
Cervical alignment change before and after operation.
| After surgery | Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Before surgery | Lordosis | Hypolordosis | |
| Lordosis | 45 | 16 | 61 |
| Hypolordosis | 9 | 7 | 16 |
| Kyphosis | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| Total | 55 | 25 | 80 |
Figure 1Pre-operative, post-operative, and final follow up cervical Cobb angle change. *p < 0.05 comparing to pre-operation using paired t test. **P < 0.05 comparing to pre-operation and post-operation using paired t test.
Cox regression analysis for the predictive value of post-operation lordosis angle change in RASP occurrence.
| Parameter |
| Wald | P value | Hazard Ratio |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| C27CA-c | −0.518 | 4.262 | 0.039* | 0.454 (0.297–0.692) |
| FCA-c | 0.111 | 2.139 | 0.144 | 1.118 (0.963–1.298) |
C27CA-c: Post-surgery C2-7 Cobb angle change; FCA-c: Post-surgery fused segment Cobb angle change.
Figure 2Validation of post-operation models with normal and decreased lordosis after C5 subtotal corpectomy and fusion.
Figure 3The segmental ROM percentage at superior (left row), inferior (middle row) and both (right row) adjacent segment in the intact model, post-operation models with normal lordosis (post-N) and decreased lordosis (post-H) in flexion (A–C), extension (D–F), lateral bending (G–I) and axial rotation (J–L) under moment-control loading.
Figure 4The superior and inferior segment ROM in intact and post-operation models with different lordosis in flexion and extension under displacement-control loading. (SAS: superior adjacent segment; IAS: inferior adjacent segment; F: flexion; E: extension.)
Figure 5Comparison of intradiscal pressure distribution of superior (A, B and E, F)and inferior (C, D, and G, H) adjacent segment in flexion (A–D) and extension (E–H) under displacement-control loading. (A,C,E,G: post-N model; B,D,F,H post-H model).
Figure 6The finite element models of C2-7 cervical spine after C5 subtotal corpectomy reconstruction with bone graft and anterior plate fixation. The post-operation models showed normal lordosis (Post-N model) (A) and decreased lordosis (Post-H model) (B).
Material Properties of Cervical Spine Finite Element Modeling.
| Tissue names | Element type | Material Type | Material Parameters | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cortical bone | Shell | power-law plasticity | ρ = 1.61e-9 t/mm3, E = 16700 MPa, μ = 0.3, K = 354.8 MPa, N = 0.2772 |
|
| Cancellous bone | hexahedron | power-law plasticity | ρ = 8.77e-10 t/mm3, E = 291 MPa, μ = 0.3, K = 5.7 MPa, N = 0.2741 |
|
| Endplate | Shell | power-law plasticity | ρ = 1.61e-9 t/mm3, E = 5600 MPa, μ = 0.3, K = 153.2 MPa, N = 0.2772 |
|
| Matrix of annulus fibrosus | hexahedron | Hill Foam | m = 3, n = 2, C1 = 2.1857 MPa, b1 = 1, C2 = −2.36 MPa, b2 = 2, C3 = 0.891 MPa, b3 = 3 |
|
| Annulus fibrosus fibers | Shell | Fabric | Strain-Stress Curve |
|
| Nucleus | hexahedron | General viscoelastic | N = 4, K = 1.72 Gpa G1 = 0.5930 kPa, β1 = 0.001477 1/s, G2 = 0.6763 kPa, β2 = 0.061524 1/s, G3 = 0.9516 kPa, β3 = 1.017893 1/s, G4 = 2.0384 kPa, β4 = 13.20041 1/s, |
|
| Cartilage endplate | hexahedron | Isotropic elastic | ρ = 1.36e-9 t/mm3, E = 25 MPa, μ = 0.4 |
|
| Facet articular cartilages | Hexahedron | Isotropic elastic | ρ = 1.36e-9 t/mm3, E = 10.4 MPa, μ = 0.4 |
|
| Ligaments | Beam | Non-linear | Displacement-Force Curve |
|
| Bone graft | hexahedron | Power-law plasticity | ρ = 8.77e-10 t/mm3, E = 291 MPa, μ = 0.3, K = 5.7 MPa, N = 0.2741 |
|
| Anterior plate | Hexahedron | Isotropic elastic | E = 110 GPa, μ = 0.3 |
|
| Anterior screw | Hexahedron | Isotropic elastic | E = 110 GPa, μ = 0.3 |
|
β, viscoelastic parameter; E, Young’s modulus; G, viscoelastic modulus; K, bulk modulus; N, hardening exponent; n, Ci, bi, material constant; μ, Poisson’s ratio.