Maeva Lopez Poncelas1,2, Luigi La Barbera1,2,3, Jeremy J Rawlinson1,4, David W Polly5, Carl-Eric Aubin6,7. 1. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Polytechnique Montréal, Downtown Station, P.O. Box 6079, Montreal, QC, H3C 3A7, Canada. 2. Research Center, Sainte-Justine University Hospital Center, 3175, Cote Sainte-Catherine Road, Montreal, QC, H3T 1C5, Canada. 3. Laboratory of Biological Structure Mechanics, Department of Chemistry, Materials and Chemical Engineering "Giulio Natta", Politecnico di Milano, Piazza Leonardo da Vinci, 32 20133, Milan, MI, Italy. 4. Spine Applied Research, Cranial and Spinal Technologies Medtronic, 18400 Pyramid Place, Memphis, TN, 38132, USA. 5. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Minnesota, 2512 South 7th Street, Suite R200, Minneapolis, MN, 55455, USA. 6. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Polytechnique Montréal, Downtown Station, P.O. Box 6079, Montreal, QC, H3C 3A7, Canada. Carl-Eric.Aubin@polymtl.ca. 7. Research Center, Sainte-Justine University Hospital Center, 3175, Cote Sainte-Catherine Road, Montreal, QC, H3T 1C5, Canada. Carl-Eric.Aubin@polymtl.ca.
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Assessment of sagittal lordosis distribution on mechanical proximal junctional failure-related risks through computer-based biomechanical models. OBJECTIVE: To biomechanically assess how lordosis distribution influences radiographical and biomechanical indices related to Proximal Junctional Failure (PJF). The "optimal" patient-specific targets to restore the sagittal balance in posterior spinal fusion are still not known. Among these, the effect of the lumbar lordosis correction strategy on complications such as PJF remain uncertain. METHODS: In this computational biomechanical study, five adult spinal deformity patients who underwent posterior spinal fixation were retrospectively reviewed. Their surgery, first erect posture and flexion movement were simulated with a patient-specific multibody model. Three pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO) levels (L3, L4, and L5) were simulated, with consistent global lordosis for a given patient and pelvic tilt adjusted accordingly to the actual surgery. Computed loads on the anterior spine and instrumentation were analyzed and compared using Kruskal-Wallis statistical tests and Spearman correlations. RESULTS: In these models, no significant correlations were found between the lordosis distribution index (LDI), PSO level and biomechanical PJF-related indices. However, increasing the sagittal vertical axis (SVA) and thoracolumbar junction angle (TLJ) and decreasing the sacral slope (SS) increased the bending moment sustained by the rods at the proximal instrumented level (r = 0.52, 0.57, - 0.56, respectively, p < 0.05). There was a negative correlation between SS and the bending moment held by the adjacent proximal segment (r = - 0.71, p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Based on these biomechanical simulations, there was no correlation between the lordosis distribution and PJF-associated biomechanical factors. However, increasing SS and flattening the TLJ, as postural adjustment strategies required by a more distal PSO, did decrease such PJF-related factors. Sagittal restoration and PJF risks remain multifactorial, and the use of patient-specific biomechanical models may help to better understand the complex interrelated mechanisms.
STUDY DESIGN: Assessment of sagittal lordosis distribution on mechanical proximal junctional failure-related risks through computer-based biomechanical models. OBJECTIVE: To biomechanically assess how lordosis distribution influences radiographical and biomechanical indices related to Proximal Junctional Failure (PJF). The "optimal" patient-specific targets to restore the sagittal balance in posterior spinal fusion are still not known. Among these, the effect of the lumbar lordosis correction strategy on complications such as PJF remain uncertain. METHODS: In this computational biomechanical study, five adult spinal deformity patients who underwent posterior spinal fixation were retrospectively reviewed. Their surgery, first erect posture and flexion movement were simulated with a patient-specific multibody model. Three pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO) levels (L3, L4, and L5) were simulated, with consistent global lordosis for a given patient and pelvic tilt adjusted accordingly to the actual surgery. Computed loads on the anterior spine and instrumentation were analyzed and compared using Kruskal-Wallis statistical tests and Spearman correlations. RESULTS: In these models, no significant correlations were found between the lordosis distribution index (LDI), PSO level and biomechanical PJF-related indices. However, increasing the sagittal vertical axis (SVA) and thoracolumbar junction angle (TLJ) and decreasing the sacral slope (SS) increased the bending moment sustained by the rods at the proximal instrumented level (r = 0.52, 0.57, - 0.56, respectively, p < 0.05). There was a negative correlation between SS and the bending moment held by the adjacent proximal segment (r = - 0.71, p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Based on these biomechanical simulations, there was no correlation between the lordosis distribution and PJF-associated biomechanical factors. However, increasing SS and flattening the TLJ, as postural adjustment strategies required by a more distal PSO, did decrease such PJF-related factors. Sagittal restoration and PJF risks remain multifactorial, and the use of patient-specific biomechanical models may help to better understand the complex interrelated mechanisms.
Authors: Eva Jacobs; Barend J van Royen; Sander M J van Kuijk; Johannes M R Merk; Agnita Stadhouder; Lodewijk W van Rhijn; Paul C Willems Journal: Spine J Date: 2018-11-30 Impact factor: 4.166
Authors: Christopher P Ames; Justin K Scheer; Virginie Lafage; Justin S Smith; Shay Bess; Sigurd H Berven; Gregory M Mundis; Rajiv K Sethi; Donald A Deinlein; Jeffrey D Coe; Lloyd A Hey; Michael D Daubs Journal: Spine Deform Date: 2016-06-16
Authors: Remco J P Doodkorte; Alex K Roth; Jacobus J Arts; L M Arno Lataster; Lodewijk W van Rhijn; Paul C Willems Journal: Spine J Date: 2021-01-23 Impact factor: 4.166
Authors: Bassel G Diebo; Neil V Shah; Oheneba Boachie-Adjei; Feng Zhu; Dominique A Rothenfluh; Carl B Paulino; Frank J Schwab; Virginie Lafage Journal: Lancet Date: 2019-07-11 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Jeffrey L Gum; Breton Line; Leah Y Carreon; Richard A Hostin; Samrat Yeramaneni; Steven D Glassman; Douglas L Burton; Justin S Smith; Christopher I Shaffrey; Peter G Passias; Virginie Lafage; Christopher P Ames; R Shay Bess Journal: Spine Deform Date: 2021-09-01
Authors: Kenny Yat Hong Kwan; Lawrence G Lenke; Christopher I Shaffrey; Leah Y Carreon; Benny T Dahl; Michael G Fehlings; Christopher P Ames; Oheneba Boachie-Adjei; Mark B Dekutoski; Khaled M Kebaish; Stephen J Lewis; Yukihiro Matsuyama; Hossein Mehdian; Yong Qiu; Frank J Schwab; Kenneth Man Chee Cheung Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2021-02-01 Impact factor: 4.755