Cargando…
A finite element analysis on comparing the stability of different posterior fixation methods for thoracic total en bloc spondylectomy
OBJECTIVE: To compare the spinal stability with different fixation methods after thoracic TES using finite element analysis METHODS: The spinal finite element model was established from a healthy volunteer, and the validity was verified. The models of T8 thoracic total en bloc spondylectomy (TES) wi...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7422552/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32787876 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-020-01833-0 |
_version_ | 1783570026880565248 |
---|---|
author | Liang, Yun Cao, Yuanwu Gong, Zhiguo Jiang, Chang Jin, Lixia Li, Zheng Chen, Zixian Jiang, Chun Jiang, Xiaoxing |
author_facet | Liang, Yun Cao, Yuanwu Gong, Zhiguo Jiang, Chang Jin, Lixia Li, Zheng Chen, Zixian Jiang, Chun Jiang, Xiaoxing |
author_sort | Liang, Yun |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: To compare the spinal stability with different fixation methods after thoracic TES using finite element analysis METHODS: The spinal finite element model was established from a healthy volunteer, and the validity was verified. The models of T8 thoracic total en bloc spondylectomy (TES) with and without artificial vertebral body were established combination with different fixation methods: the first was long segment fixation with fixed segments T5–7, T9–11; the second was short segment fixation with fixed segments T6–7, T9–10; the third was modified short segment with a pair of vertebral body screws on T7 and T9 added on the basis of short segment fixation. The motions of each model in standing state were simulated in software. The range of motion (ROM) and internal fixation stress changes were analyzed. RESULTS: When anterior support was effective, the three fixation methods could effectively maintain the stability of the spine. However, when anterior support failed, the ROM of the long segment fixation group and the short segment fixation group in the flexion-extension directions was significantly higher than that of when the anterior support existed, while the modified short segment fixation group had no significant changes. Meanwhile, the stress of internal fixation in the long segment fixation group and the short segment fixation group were greatly increased. However, there were no significant changes in modified short segment fixation group. CONCLUSION: After TES, the presence of the thoracic cage gives partial anterior stabilization. When the anterior support failed, the modified short segment fixation method can provide better stability. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7422552 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-74225522020-08-21 A finite element analysis on comparing the stability of different posterior fixation methods for thoracic total en bloc spondylectomy Liang, Yun Cao, Yuanwu Gong, Zhiguo Jiang, Chang Jin, Lixia Li, Zheng Chen, Zixian Jiang, Chun Jiang, Xiaoxing J Orthop Surg Res Research Article OBJECTIVE: To compare the spinal stability with different fixation methods after thoracic TES using finite element analysis METHODS: The spinal finite element model was established from a healthy volunteer, and the validity was verified. The models of T8 thoracic total en bloc spondylectomy (TES) with and without artificial vertebral body were established combination with different fixation methods: the first was long segment fixation with fixed segments T5–7, T9–11; the second was short segment fixation with fixed segments T6–7, T9–10; the third was modified short segment with a pair of vertebral body screws on T7 and T9 added on the basis of short segment fixation. The motions of each model in standing state were simulated in software. The range of motion (ROM) and internal fixation stress changes were analyzed. RESULTS: When anterior support was effective, the three fixation methods could effectively maintain the stability of the spine. However, when anterior support failed, the ROM of the long segment fixation group and the short segment fixation group in the flexion-extension directions was significantly higher than that of when the anterior support existed, while the modified short segment fixation group had no significant changes. Meanwhile, the stress of internal fixation in the long segment fixation group and the short segment fixation group were greatly increased. However, there were no significant changes in modified short segment fixation group. CONCLUSION: After TES, the presence of the thoracic cage gives partial anterior stabilization. When the anterior support failed, the modified short segment fixation method can provide better stability. BioMed Central 2020-08-12 /pmc/articles/PMC7422552/ /pubmed/32787876 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-020-01833-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Liang, Yun Cao, Yuanwu Gong, Zhiguo Jiang, Chang Jin, Lixia Li, Zheng Chen, Zixian Jiang, Chun Jiang, Xiaoxing A finite element analysis on comparing the stability of different posterior fixation methods for thoracic total en bloc spondylectomy |
title | A finite element analysis on comparing the stability of different posterior fixation methods for thoracic total en bloc spondylectomy |
title_full | A finite element analysis on comparing the stability of different posterior fixation methods for thoracic total en bloc spondylectomy |
title_fullStr | A finite element analysis on comparing the stability of different posterior fixation methods for thoracic total en bloc spondylectomy |
title_full_unstemmed | A finite element analysis on comparing the stability of different posterior fixation methods for thoracic total en bloc spondylectomy |
title_short | A finite element analysis on comparing the stability of different posterior fixation methods for thoracic total en bloc spondylectomy |
title_sort | finite element analysis on comparing the stability of different posterior fixation methods for thoracic total en bloc spondylectomy |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7422552/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32787876 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-020-01833-0 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT liangyun afiniteelementanalysisoncomparingthestabilityofdifferentposteriorfixationmethodsforthoracictotalenblocspondylectomy AT caoyuanwu afiniteelementanalysisoncomparingthestabilityofdifferentposteriorfixationmethodsforthoracictotalenblocspondylectomy AT gongzhiguo afiniteelementanalysisoncomparingthestabilityofdifferentposteriorfixationmethodsforthoracictotalenblocspondylectomy AT jiangchang afiniteelementanalysisoncomparingthestabilityofdifferentposteriorfixationmethodsforthoracictotalenblocspondylectomy AT jinlixia afiniteelementanalysisoncomparingthestabilityofdifferentposteriorfixationmethodsforthoracictotalenblocspondylectomy AT lizheng afiniteelementanalysisoncomparingthestabilityofdifferentposteriorfixationmethodsforthoracictotalenblocspondylectomy AT chenzixian afiniteelementanalysisoncomparingthestabilityofdifferentposteriorfixationmethodsforthoracictotalenblocspondylectomy AT jiangchun afiniteelementanalysisoncomparingthestabilityofdifferentposteriorfixationmethodsforthoracictotalenblocspondylectomy AT jiangxiaoxing afiniteelementanalysisoncomparingthestabilityofdifferentposteriorfixationmethodsforthoracictotalenblocspondylectomy AT liangyun finiteelementanalysisoncomparingthestabilityofdifferentposteriorfixationmethodsforthoracictotalenblocspondylectomy AT caoyuanwu finiteelementanalysisoncomparingthestabilityofdifferentposteriorfixationmethodsforthoracictotalenblocspondylectomy AT gongzhiguo finiteelementanalysisoncomparingthestabilityofdifferentposteriorfixationmethodsforthoracictotalenblocspondylectomy AT jiangchang finiteelementanalysisoncomparingthestabilityofdifferentposteriorfixationmethodsforthoracictotalenblocspondylectomy AT jinlixia finiteelementanalysisoncomparingthestabilityofdifferentposteriorfixationmethodsforthoracictotalenblocspondylectomy AT lizheng finiteelementanalysisoncomparingthestabilityofdifferentposteriorfixationmethodsforthoracictotalenblocspondylectomy AT chenzixian finiteelementanalysisoncomparingthestabilityofdifferentposteriorfixationmethodsforthoracictotalenblocspondylectomy AT jiangchun finiteelementanalysisoncomparingthestabilityofdifferentposteriorfixationmethodsforthoracictotalenblocspondylectomy AT jiangxiaoxing finiteelementanalysisoncomparingthestabilityofdifferentposteriorfixationmethodsforthoracictotalenblocspondylectomy |