Literature DB >> 30738222

Biomechanical testing of different posterior fusion devices on lumbar spinal range of motion.

Frank Hartmann1, Thomas Nusselt2, Gerrit Maier3, Pol Maria Rommens4, Erol Gercek5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Recent minimal-invasive posterior fusion devices are supposed to provide stability and obtain fusion in combination with interbody cages in the instrumented segment. The aim of the present study is to evaluate the primary stability of two minimal-invasive posterior prototypes compared to an established spinous process plate and standard pedicle screw instrumentation.
METHODS: Seven fresh frozen human cadaver lumbar spines (L2-L5) were tested in a spinal testing device with a moment of 7.5 Nm. Spinal stability was determined as mean range of motion (RoM) in the segment L3/L4 during extension-flexion, lateral bending and axial rotation. The RoM was measured during five conditions: 1. intact; 2. working prototype composed of an interspinous device and process plates; 3. an established spinous process fixation device 4. working prototype of facet fixation and 5. pedicle screw fixation.
FINDINGS: All devices caused a significant reduction of RoM during extension-flexion. The RoM during lateral bending was significantly reduced to 37% (of intact) by pedicle screws and 68% by facet fixation prototype. During axial rotation the RoM was significantly reduced to 52% by pedicle screws and to 86% by facet fixation prototype. The other devices had no significant influence on RoM during lateral bending and axial rotation.
INTERPRETATION: The facet fixation prototype provided less primary stability compared to pedicle screws, but had significant advantages over spinous process fixation techniques. The results encourage further testing of this implant as a minimal-invasive approach for posterior fixation.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biomechanics; Facet fixation; Lumbar spinal stenosis; Pedicle screw fixation; Spinous process fixation

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30738222     DOI: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2019.01.012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)        ISSN: 0268-0033            Impact factor:   2.063


  1 in total

1.  Posterior spinal instrumentation and decompression with or without cross-link?

Authors:  Marco D Burkhard; Frédéric Cornaz; José Miguel Spirig; Florian Wanivenhaus; Rafael Loucas; Marie-Rosa Fasser; Jonas Widmer; Mazda Farshad
Journal:  N Am Spine Soc J       Date:  2021-11-17
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.