Cargando…

In Vitro Comparison of Dynesys, PEEK, and Titanium Constructs in the Lumbar Spine

Introduction. Pedicle based posterior dynamic stabilization systems aim to stabilize the pathologic spine while also allowing sufficient motion to mitigate adjacent level effects. Two flexible constructs that have been proposed to act in such a manner, the Dynesys Dynamic Stabilization System and PE...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yeager, Matthew S., Cook, Daniel J., Cheng, Boyle C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4553300/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26366303
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/895931
_version_ 1782387863574282240
author Yeager, Matthew S.
Cook, Daniel J.
Cheng, Boyle C.
author_facet Yeager, Matthew S.
Cook, Daniel J.
Cheng, Boyle C.
author_sort Yeager, Matthew S.
collection PubMed
description Introduction. Pedicle based posterior dynamic stabilization systems aim to stabilize the pathologic spine while also allowing sufficient motion to mitigate adjacent level effects. Two flexible constructs that have been proposed to act in such a manner, the Dynesys Dynamic Stabilization System and PEEK rod, have yet to be directly compared in vitro to a rigid Titanium rod. Methods. Human lumbar specimens were tested in flexion extension, lateral bending, and axial torsion to evaluate the following conditions at L4-L5: Intact, Dynesys, PEEK rod, Titanium rod, and Destabilized. Intervertebral range of motion, interpedicular travel, and interpedicular displacement metrics were evaluated from 3rd-cycle data using an optoelectric tracking system. Results. Statistically significant decreases in ROM compared to Intact and Destabilized conditions were detected for the instrumented conditions during flexion extension and lateral bending. AT ROM was significantly less than Destabilized but not the Intact condition. Similar trends were found for interpedicular displacement in all modes of loading; however, interpedicular travel trends were less consistent. More importantly, no metrics under any mode of loading revealed significant differences between Dynesys, PEEK, and Titanium. Conclusion. The results of this study support previous findings that Dynesys and PEEK constructs behave similarly to a Titanium rod in vitro.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4553300
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Hindawi Publishing Corporation
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-45533002015-09-13 In Vitro Comparison of Dynesys, PEEK, and Titanium Constructs in the Lumbar Spine Yeager, Matthew S. Cook, Daniel J. Cheng, Boyle C. Adv Orthop Research Article Introduction. Pedicle based posterior dynamic stabilization systems aim to stabilize the pathologic spine while also allowing sufficient motion to mitigate adjacent level effects. Two flexible constructs that have been proposed to act in such a manner, the Dynesys Dynamic Stabilization System and PEEK rod, have yet to be directly compared in vitro to a rigid Titanium rod. Methods. Human lumbar specimens were tested in flexion extension, lateral bending, and axial torsion to evaluate the following conditions at L4-L5: Intact, Dynesys, PEEK rod, Titanium rod, and Destabilized. Intervertebral range of motion, interpedicular travel, and interpedicular displacement metrics were evaluated from 3rd-cycle data using an optoelectric tracking system. Results. Statistically significant decreases in ROM compared to Intact and Destabilized conditions were detected for the instrumented conditions during flexion extension and lateral bending. AT ROM was significantly less than Destabilized but not the Intact condition. Similar trends were found for interpedicular displacement in all modes of loading; however, interpedicular travel trends were less consistent. More importantly, no metrics under any mode of loading revealed significant differences between Dynesys, PEEK, and Titanium. Conclusion. The results of this study support previous findings that Dynesys and PEEK constructs behave similarly to a Titanium rod in vitro. Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2015 2015-08-17 /pmc/articles/PMC4553300/ /pubmed/26366303 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/895931 Text en Copyright © 2015 Matthew S. Yeager et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Yeager, Matthew S.
Cook, Daniel J.
Cheng, Boyle C.
In Vitro Comparison of Dynesys, PEEK, and Titanium Constructs in the Lumbar Spine
title In Vitro Comparison of Dynesys, PEEK, and Titanium Constructs in the Lumbar Spine
title_full In Vitro Comparison of Dynesys, PEEK, and Titanium Constructs in the Lumbar Spine
title_fullStr In Vitro Comparison of Dynesys, PEEK, and Titanium Constructs in the Lumbar Spine
title_full_unstemmed In Vitro Comparison of Dynesys, PEEK, and Titanium Constructs in the Lumbar Spine
title_short In Vitro Comparison of Dynesys, PEEK, and Titanium Constructs in the Lumbar Spine
title_sort in vitro comparison of dynesys, peek, and titanium constructs in the lumbar spine
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4553300/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26366303
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/895931
work_keys_str_mv AT yeagermatthews invitrocomparisonofdynesyspeekandtitaniumconstructsinthelumbarspine
AT cookdanielj invitrocomparisonofdynesyspeekandtitaniumconstructsinthelumbarspine
AT chengboylec invitrocomparisonofdynesyspeekandtitaniumconstructsinthelumbarspine