Niloufar Shekouhi1, Ardalan S Vosoughi1, Joseph M Zavatsky2, Vijay K Goel1, Alekos A Theologis3. 1. Engineering Center for Orthopedic Research Excellence (E-CORE), Departments of Bioengineering and Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH, USA. 2. Spine & Scoliosis Specialists, Tampa, FL, USA. 3. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University of California - San Francisco (UCSF), 500 Parnassus Ave, MUW 3rd Floor, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA. alekos.theologis@ucsf.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Multi-rod constructs are used commonly to stabilize pedicle subtraction osteotomies (PSO). This study aimed to evaluate biomechanical properties of different satellite rod configurations and effects of screw-type spanning a PSO. METHODS: A validated 3D spinopelvic finite element model with a L3 PSO (30°) was used to evaluate 5 models: (1) Control (T10-pelvis + 2 rods); (2) lateral satellite rods connected via offsets to monoaxial screws (LatSat-Mono) or (3) polyaxial screws (LatSat-Poly); (4) in-line satellite rods connected to monoaxial screws (InSat-Mono) or (4) polyaxial screws (InSat-Poly). Global and PSO range of motions (ROM) were recorded. Rods' von Mises stresses and PSO forces were recorded and the percent differences from Control were calculated. RESULTS: All satellite rods (save InSat-Mono) increased PSO ROM and decreased primary rods' von Mises stresses at the PSO. Lateral rods increased PSO forces (LatSat-Mono:347.1 N; LatSat-Poly:348.6 N; Control:336 N) and had relatively lower stresses, while in-line rods decreased PSO forces (InSat-Mono:280.1 N; InSat-Poly:330.7 N) and had relatively higher stresses. Relative to polyaxial screws, monoaxial screws further decreased PSO ROM, increased satellite rods' stresses, and decreased PSO forces for in-line rods, but did not change PSO forces for lateral rods. CONCLUSION: Multi-rod constructs using in-line and lateral satellite rods across a PSO reduced primary rods' stresses. Subtle differences in biomechanics suggest lateral satellite rods, irrespective of screw type, increase PSO forces and lower rod stresses compared to in-line satellite rods, which had a high degree of posterior instrumentation stress shielding and lower PSO forces. Clinical studies are warranted to determine if these findings influence clinical outcomes.
PURPOSE: Multi-rod constructs are used commonly to stabilize pedicle subtraction osteotomies (PSO). This study aimed to evaluate biomechanical properties of different satellite rod configurations and effects of screw-type spanning a PSO. METHODS: A validated 3D spinopelvic finite element model with a L3 PSO (30°) was used to evaluate 5 models: (1) Control (T10-pelvis + 2 rods); (2) lateral satellite rods connected via offsets to monoaxial screws (LatSat-Mono) or (3) polyaxial screws (LatSat-Poly); (4) in-line satellite rods connected to monoaxial screws (InSat-Mono) or (4) polyaxial screws (InSat-Poly). Global and PSO range of motions (ROM) were recorded. Rods' von Mises stresses and PSO forces were recorded and the percent differences from Control were calculated. RESULTS: All satellite rods (save InSat-Mono) increased PSO ROM and decreased primary rods' von Mises stresses at the PSO. Lateral rods increased PSO forces (LatSat-Mono:347.1 N; LatSat-Poly:348.6 N; Control:336 N) and had relatively lower stresses, while in-line rods decreased PSO forces (InSat-Mono:280.1 N; InSat-Poly:330.7 N) and had relatively higher stresses. Relative to polyaxial screws, monoaxial screws further decreased PSO ROM, increased satellite rods' stresses, and decreased PSO forces for in-line rods, but did not change PSO forces for lateral rods. CONCLUSION: Multi-rod constructs using in-line and lateral satellite rods across a PSO reduced primary rods' stresses. Subtle differences in biomechanics suggest lateral satellite rods, irrespective of screw type, increase PSO forces and lower rod stresses compared to in-line satellite rods, which had a high degree of posterior instrumentation stress shielding and lower PSO forces. Clinical studies are warranted to determine if these findings influence clinical outcomes.
Authors: Luigi La Barbera; Hans-Joachim Wilke; Christian Liebsch; Tomaso Villa; Andrea Luca; Fabio Galbusera; Marco Brayda-Bruno Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2019-08-14 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: Pedro Berjano; Ming Xu; Marco Damilano; Thomas Scholl; Claudio Lamartina; Michael Jekir; Fabio Galbusera Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2019-05-25 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: Luigi La Barbera; Marco Brayda-Bruno; Christian Liebsch; Tomaso Villa; Andrea Luca; Fabio Galbusera; Hans-Joachim Wilke Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2018-05-08 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: Vedat Deviren; Jessica A Tang; Justin K Scheer; Jenni M Buckley; Murat Pekmezci; R Trigg McClellan; Christopher P Ames Journal: Global Spine J Date: 2012-12-06
Authors: Luigi La Barbera; Hans-Joachim Wilke; Maria Luisa Ruspi; Marco Palanca; Christian Liebsch; Andrea Luca; Marco Brayda-Bruno; Fabio Galbusera; Luca Cristofolini Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-02-11 Impact factor: 4.379