Literature DB >> 8970923

Loads on an internal spinal fixation device during walking.

A Rohlmann1, G Bergmann, F Graichen.   

Abstract

Only little knowledge exists concerning the loads on internal spinal fixation devices during walking. In this study, forces and moments were measured in two patients using telemeterized spinal fixators. Although implant loads differed strongly before and after anterior fusion as well as between the two patients, some results were consistent. In every test series, implant loads were higher in walking than in lying, sitting or standing. Walking speed had little influence on implant loads. Staircase walking put slightly higher loads on the implants than normal level walking. Normal use of two crutches reduced implant loads only slightly, whereas a wheeled invalid walker reduced them by about 25%.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 8970923     DOI: 10.1016/s0021-9290(96)00103-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biomech        ISSN: 0021-9290            Impact factor:   2.712


  21 in total

1.  Biomechanical evaluation of the Total Facet Arthroplasty System® (TFAS®): loading as compared to a rigid posterior instrumentation system.

Authors:  Simon G Sjovold; Qingan Zhu; Anton Bowden; Chad R Larson; Peter M de Bakker; Marta L Villarraga; Jorge A Ochoa; David M Rosler; Peter A Cripton
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-03-10       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  A history of spine biomechanics. Focus on 20th century progress.

Authors:  T R Oxland
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 1.000

3.  Comparison of the effects of bilateral posterior dynamic and rigid fixation devices on the loads in the lumbar spine: a finite element analysis.

Authors:  Antonius Rohlmann; Nagananda K Burra; Thomas Zander; Georg Bergmann
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2007-01-06       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 4.  Parameters that effect spine biomechanics following cervical disc replacement.

Authors:  Vijay K Goel; Ahmad Faizan; Vivek Palepu; Sanghita Bhattacharya
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-05-20       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Effect of augmentation techniques on the failure of pedicle screws under cranio-caudal cyclic loading.

Authors:  Richard Bostelmann; Alexander Keiler; Hans Jakob Steiger; Armin Scholz; Jan Frederick Cornelius; Werner Schmoelz
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-03-27       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  A pedicle screw system and a lamina hook system provide similar primary and long-term stability: a biomechanical in vitro study with quasi-static and dynamic loading conditions.

Authors:  Hans-Joachim Wilke; Dominik Kaiser; David Volkheimer; Carsten Hackenbroch; Klaus Püschel; Michael Rauschmann
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-07-12       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  How does a novel monoplanar pedicle screw perform biomechanically relative to monoaxial and polyaxial designs?

Authors:  Samuel R Schroerlucke; Nikolai Steklov; Gregory M Mundis; James F Marino; Behrooz A Akbarnia; Robert K Eastlack
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-06-12       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  Time to augment?! Impact of cement augmentation on pedicle screw fixation strength depending on bone mineral density.

Authors:  Lukas Weiser; Gerd Huber; Kay Sellenschloh; Lennart Viezens; Klaus Püschel; Michael M Morlock; Wolfgang Lehmann
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2018-06-09       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  Preclinical evaluation of posterior spine stabilization devices: can the current standards represent basic everyday life activities?

Authors:  Luigi La Barbera; Fabio Galbusera; Hans-Joachim Wilke; Tomaso Villa
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-05-28       Impact factor: 3.134

10.  Effect of screw position on load transfer in lumbar pedicle screws: a non-idealized finite element analysis.

Authors:  Anna G U S Newcomb; Seungwon Baek; Brian P Kelly; Neil R Crawford
Journal:  Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin       Date:  2016-07-25       Impact factor: 1.763

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.