Literature DB >> 9704372

Revision of failed pedicle screws using hydroxyapatite cement. A biomechanical analysis.

S A Yerby1, E Toh, R F McLain.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: The biomechanical influence of in situ setting hydroxyapatite cement was examined for use in pedicle screw revision surgery. Pull-out testing of control and pedicle screws augmented with hydroxyapatite cement was performed in human cadaver vertebrae.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the immediate effect of using hydroxyapatite cement to augment revision pedicle screws after failure of the primary pedicle screw fixation. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The potential problems associated with using polymethylmethacrylate to augment revision pedicular instrumentation have prompted the search for other solutions. The introduction of resorbable hydroxyapatite pastes may have provided new biocompatible solutions for pedicle screw revision.
METHODS: Ten human cadaver vertebrae were instrumented with 6.0-mm pedicle screws in each pedicle. The screws were loaded to failure in axial tension (pull-out). The failed pedicles then were instrumented with 7.0-mm pedicle screws, either augmented with hydroxyapatite cement or nonaugmented, which also were loaded to failure. Finally, the nonaugmented 7.0-mm screw hole was reinstrumented with a hydroxyapatite cement-augmented, 7.0-mm pedicle screw and loaded to failure.
RESULTS: The pull-out strength of the 7.0-mm, hydroxyapatite cement-augmented screws was 325% (P = 2.9 x 10(-5)) of that of the 6.0-mm control screws, whereas the strength of the 7.0-mm nonaugmented screws was only 73% (P = 2.0 x 10(-2)) of that of the 6.0-mm control screws. The 7.0-mm screws augmented with hydroxyapatite cement also were able to salvage 7.0-mm pull-out sites to 384% (P = 6.9E-5) of the pull-out strength of the 7.0-mm nonaugmented screws.
CONCLUSIONS: Hydroxyapatite cement may be a mechanically viable alternative to polymethyl methacrylate for augmenting revision pedicular instrumentation and should be considered for future experimental, animal, and clinical testing.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9704372     DOI: 10.1097/00007632-199808010-00008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  15 in total

1.  [Pedicle screw augmentation from a biomechanical perspective].

Authors:  V Bullmann; U R Liljenqvist; R Rödl; T L Schulte
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 1.087

2.  Biomechanical evaluation of an expansive pedicle screw in calf vertebrae.

Authors:  Wei Lei; Zixiang Wu
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2005-04-30       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Polymethylmethacrylate augmentation of the pedicle screw: the cement distribution in the vertebral body.

Authors:  Ming-Hsien Hu; Hung Ta H Wu; Ming-Chau Chang; Wing-Kuang Yu; Shih-Tien Wang; Chien-Lin Liu
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-05-01       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  Clinical efficacy of bone cement augmented screw fixation for the severe osteoporotic spine.

Authors:  Jong Hun Seo; Chang Il Ju; Seok Won Kim; Jong Kyu Kim; Ho Shin
Journal:  Korean J Spine       Date:  2012-06-30

5.  Osseodensification for enhancement of spinal surgical hardware fixation.

Authors:  Christopher D Lopez; Adham M Alifarag; Andrea Torroni; Nick Tovar; J Rodrigo Diaz-Siso; Lukasz Witek; Eduardo D Rodriguez; Paulo G Coelho
Journal:  J Mech Behav Biomed Mater       Date:  2017-01-13

6.  Revision pedicle screws with impaction bone grafting: a case series.

Authors:  Matthew Alexander Lea; Mahmoud Elmalky; Silviu Sabou; Irfan Siddique; Rajat Verma; Saeed Mohammad
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2021-09

Review 7.  Innovation of Surgical Techniques for Screw Fixation in Patients with Osteoporotic Spine.

Authors:  Haruo Kanno; Yoshito Onoda; Ko Hashimoto; Toshimi Aizawa; Hiroshi Ozawa
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-05-04       Impact factor: 4.964

Review 8.  The current treatment--a survey of osteoporotic fracture treatment. Osteoporotic spine fractures: the spine surgeon's perspective.

Authors:  Paul F Heini
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2004-09-09       Impact factor: 4.507

9.  Comparison between two pedicle screw augmentation instrumentations in adult degenerative scoliosis with osteoporosis.

Authors:  Yang Xie; Qiang Fu; Zi-qiang Chen; Zhi-cai Shi; Xiao-dong Zhu; Chuan-feng Wang; Ming Li
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2011-12-21       Impact factor: 2.362

Review 10.  Designs and techniques that improve the pullout strength of pedicle screws in osteoporotic vertebrae: current status.

Authors:  Thomas M Shea; Jake Laun; Sabrina A Gonzalez-Blohm; James J Doulgeris; William E Lee; Kamran Aghayev; Frank D Vrionis
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2014-03-03       Impact factor: 3.411

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.