Literature DB >> 29307048

Biomechanical analysis of a new lumbar interspinous device with optimized topology.

Chen-Sheng Chen1, Shih-Liang Shih2,3.   

Abstract

Interspinous spacers used stand-alone preserve joint movement but provide little protection for diseased segments of the spine. Used as adjuncts with fusion, interspinous spacers offer rigid stability but may accelerate degeneration on adjacent levels. Our new device is intended to balance the stability and preserves motion provided by the implant. A new interspinous spacer was devised according to the results of topology optimization studies. Four finite element (FE) spine models were created that consisted of an intact spine without an implant, implantation of the novel, the device for intervertebral assisted motion (DIAM system), and the Dynesys system. All models were loaded with moments, and their range of motions (ROMs), peak disc stresses, and facet contact forces were analyzed. The limited motion segment ROMs, shielded disc stresses, and unloaded facet contact forces of the new devices were greater than those of the DIAM and Dynesys system at L3-L4 in almost all directions of movements. The ROMs, disc stresses, and facet contact forces of the new devices at L2-L3 were slightly greater than those in the DIAM system, but much lower than those in the Dynesys system in most directions. This study demonstrated that the new device provided more stability at the instrumented level than the DIAM system did, especially in lateral rotation and the bending direction. The device caused fewer adjacent ROMs, lower disc stresses, and lower facet contact forces than the Dynesys system did. Additionally, this study conducted topology optimization to design the new device and created a smaller implant for minimal invasive surgery.

Keywords:  Biomechanics; Dynamic stabilization; Interspinous device; Lumbar spine; Topology optimization

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29307048     DOI: 10.1007/s11517-017-1767-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput        ISSN: 0140-0118            Impact factor:   2.602


  39 in total

1.  The effects of an interspinous implant on intervertebral disc pressures.

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

2.  Influence of Dynesys system screw profile on adjacent segment and screw.

Authors:  Chien-Lin Liu; Zheng-Cheng Zhong; Shih-Liang Shih; Chinghua Hung; Yong-Eng Lee; Chen-Sheng Chen
Journal:  J Spinal Disord Tech       Date:  2010-08

3.  Finite element analysis of the lumbar spine with a new cage using a topology optimization method.

Authors:  Zheng-Cheng Zhong; Shun-Hwa Wei; Jung-Pin Wang; Chi-Kuang Feng; Chen-Sheng Chen; Chung-huang Yu
Journal:  Med Eng Phys       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 2.242

4.  Load- and displacement-controlled finite element analyses on fusion and non-fusion spinal implants.

Authors:  Z-C Zhong; S-H Chen; C-H Hung
Journal:  Proc Inst Mech Eng H       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 1.617

5.  Occult spinous process fractures associated with interspinous process spacers.

Authors:  David H Kim; Mark Tantorski; Jeremy Shaw; Juli Martha; Ling Li; Nael Shanti; Tal Rencu; Stephen Parazin; Brian Kwon
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2011-07-15       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  The effect of disc degeneration and facet joint osteoarthritis on the segmental flexibility of the lumbar spine.

Authors:  A Fujiwara; T H Lim; H S An; N Tanaka; C H Jeon; G B Andersson; V M Haughton
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2000-12-01       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  Interspinous spacers in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spinal disease: our experience with DIAM and Aperius devices.

Authors:  Antonio P Fabrizi; Raffaella Maina; Luigi Schiabello
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-03-16       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  Does Wallis implant reduce adjacent segment degeneration above lumbosacral instrumented fusion?

Authors:  Panagiotis Korovessis; Thomas Repantis; Spyros Zacharatos; Andreas Zafiropoulos
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2009-04-23       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 9.  Analysis of complications in patients treated with the X-Stop Interspinous Process Decompression System: proposal for a novel anatomic scoring system for patient selection and review of the literature.

Authors:  Giuseppe M V Barbagallo; Giuseppe Olindo; Leonardo Corbino; Vincenzo Albanese
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 4.654

Review 10.  Interspinous process spacers.

Authors:  David H Kim; Todd J Albert
Journal:  J Am Acad Orthop Surg       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 3.020

View more
  4 in total

Review 1.  The advances of topology optimization techniques in orthopedic implants: A review.

Authors:  Naichao Wu; Shan Li; Boyan Zhang; Chenyu Wang; Bingpeng Chen; Qing Han; Jincheng Wang
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2021-08-07       Impact factor: 2.602

2.  Improving the Stability of a Hemipelvic Prosthesis Based on Bone Mineral Density Screw Channel and Prosthesis Optimization Design.

Authors:  Rongqi Zhou; Haowen Xue; Jincheng Wang; Xiaonan Wang; Yanbing Wang; Aobo Zhang; Jiaxin Zhang; Qing Han; Xin Zhao
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2022-05-30

3.  Biomechanical comparison of different interspinous process devices in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis: a finite element analysis.

Authors:  Zhengpeng Liu; Shuyi Zhang; Jia Li; Hai Tang
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2022-06-17       Impact factor: 2.562

4.  Biomechanical Evaluation of Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Coflex-F and Pedicle Screw Fixation: Finite Element Analysis of Static and Vibration Conditions.

Authors:  Jia Zhu; Hangkai Shen; Yangyang Cui; Guy R Fogel; Zhenhua Liao; Weiqiang Liu
Journal:  Orthop Surg       Date:  2022-08-10       Impact factor: 2.279

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.