Cargando…

Biomechanical Evaluation of Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Various Fixation Options: A Finite Element Analysis

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to clarify the biomechanical properties of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) using different fixation methods in normal and osteoporosis spines. METHODS: Normal and osteoporosis intact finite element models of L(1)–S(1) were established based on CT im...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Song, Chengjie, Chang, Hengrui, Zhang, Di, Zhang, Yingze, Shi, Mingxin, Meng, Xianzhong
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7957407/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33619850
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/os.12877
_version_ 1783664642489319424
author Song, Chengjie
Chang, Hengrui
Zhang, Di
Zhang, Yingze
Shi, Mingxin
Meng, Xianzhong
author_facet Song, Chengjie
Chang, Hengrui
Zhang, Di
Zhang, Yingze
Shi, Mingxin
Meng, Xianzhong
author_sort Song, Chengjie
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to clarify the biomechanical properties of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) using different fixation methods in normal and osteoporosis spines. METHODS: Normal and osteoporosis intact finite element models of L(1)–S(1) were established based on CT images of a healthy male volunteer. Group A was the normal models and group B was the osteoporosis model. Each group included four subgroups: (i) intact; (ii) stand‐alone cage (Cage); (iii) cage with lateral plate and two lateral screws (LP); and (iv) cage with bilateral pedicle screws and rods (BPSR). The L(3)–L(4) level was defined as the surgical segment. After validating the normal intact model, compressive load of 400 N and torsional moment of 10 Nm were applied to the superior surface of L(2) to simulate flexion, extension, left bending, right bending, left rotation, and right rotation motions. Surgical segmental range of motion (ROM), cage stress, endplate stress, supplemental fixation stress, and stress distribution were analyzed in each group. RESULTS: Cage provided the minimal reduction of ROM among all motions (normal, 82.30%–98.81%; osteoporosis, 92.04%–97.29% of intact model). BPSR demonstrated the maximum reduction of ROM (normal, 43.94%–61.13%; osteoporosis, 45.61%–62.27% of intact model). The ROM of LP was between that of Cage and BPSR (normal, 63.25%–79.72%; osteoporosis, 70%–87.15% of intact model). Cage had the minimal cage stress and endplate stress. With the help of LP and BPSR fixation, cage stress and endplate stress were significantly reduced in all motions, both in normal and osteoporosis finite element models. However, BPSR had more advantages. For cage stress, BPSR was at least 75.73% less than that of Cage in the normal model, and it was at least 80.10% less than that of Cage in the osteoporosis model. For endplate stress, BPSR was at least 75.98% less than that of Cage in the normal model, and it was at least 78.06% less than that of Cage in the osteoporosis model. For supplemental fixation stress, BPSR and LP were much less than the yield strength in all motions in the two groups. In addition, the comparison between the two groups showed that the ROM, cage stress, endplate stress, and supplemental fixation stress in the normal model were less than in the osteoporosis model when using the same fixation option of OLIF. CONCLUSION: Oblique lumbar interbody fusion with BPSR provided the best biomechanical stability both in normal and osteoporosis spines. The biomechanical properties of the normal spine were better than those of the osteoporosis spine when using the same fixation option of OLIF.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7957407
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-79574072021-03-19 Biomechanical Evaluation of Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Various Fixation Options: A Finite Element Analysis Song, Chengjie Chang, Hengrui Zhang, Di Zhang, Yingze Shi, Mingxin Meng, Xianzhong Orthop Surg Clinical Articles OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to clarify the biomechanical properties of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) using different fixation methods in normal and osteoporosis spines. METHODS: Normal and osteoporosis intact finite element models of L(1)–S(1) were established based on CT images of a healthy male volunteer. Group A was the normal models and group B was the osteoporosis model. Each group included four subgroups: (i) intact; (ii) stand‐alone cage (Cage); (iii) cage with lateral plate and two lateral screws (LP); and (iv) cage with bilateral pedicle screws and rods (BPSR). The L(3)–L(4) level was defined as the surgical segment. After validating the normal intact model, compressive load of 400 N and torsional moment of 10 Nm were applied to the superior surface of L(2) to simulate flexion, extension, left bending, right bending, left rotation, and right rotation motions. Surgical segmental range of motion (ROM), cage stress, endplate stress, supplemental fixation stress, and stress distribution were analyzed in each group. RESULTS: Cage provided the minimal reduction of ROM among all motions (normal, 82.30%–98.81%; osteoporosis, 92.04%–97.29% of intact model). BPSR demonstrated the maximum reduction of ROM (normal, 43.94%–61.13%; osteoporosis, 45.61%–62.27% of intact model). The ROM of LP was between that of Cage and BPSR (normal, 63.25%–79.72%; osteoporosis, 70%–87.15% of intact model). Cage had the minimal cage stress and endplate stress. With the help of LP and BPSR fixation, cage stress and endplate stress were significantly reduced in all motions, both in normal and osteoporosis finite element models. However, BPSR had more advantages. For cage stress, BPSR was at least 75.73% less than that of Cage in the normal model, and it was at least 80.10% less than that of Cage in the osteoporosis model. For endplate stress, BPSR was at least 75.98% less than that of Cage in the normal model, and it was at least 78.06% less than that of Cage in the osteoporosis model. For supplemental fixation stress, BPSR and LP were much less than the yield strength in all motions in the two groups. In addition, the comparison between the two groups showed that the ROM, cage stress, endplate stress, and supplemental fixation stress in the normal model were less than in the osteoporosis model when using the same fixation option of OLIF. CONCLUSION: Oblique lumbar interbody fusion with BPSR provided the best biomechanical stability both in normal and osteoporosis spines. The biomechanical properties of the normal spine were better than those of the osteoporosis spine when using the same fixation option of OLIF. John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd 2021-02-22 /pmc/articles/PMC7957407/ /pubmed/33619850 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/os.12877 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Orthopaedic Surgery published by Chinese Orthopaedic Association and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Clinical Articles
Song, Chengjie
Chang, Hengrui
Zhang, Di
Zhang, Yingze
Shi, Mingxin
Meng, Xianzhong
Biomechanical Evaluation of Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Various Fixation Options: A Finite Element Analysis
title Biomechanical Evaluation of Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Various Fixation Options: A Finite Element Analysis
title_full Biomechanical Evaluation of Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Various Fixation Options: A Finite Element Analysis
title_fullStr Biomechanical Evaluation of Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Various Fixation Options: A Finite Element Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Biomechanical Evaluation of Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Various Fixation Options: A Finite Element Analysis
title_short Biomechanical Evaluation of Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Various Fixation Options: A Finite Element Analysis
title_sort biomechanical evaluation of oblique lumbar interbody fusion with various fixation options: a finite element analysis
topic Clinical Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7957407/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33619850
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/os.12877
work_keys_str_mv AT songchengjie biomechanicalevaluationofobliquelumbarinterbodyfusionwithvariousfixationoptionsafiniteelementanalysis
AT changhengrui biomechanicalevaluationofobliquelumbarinterbodyfusionwithvariousfixationoptionsafiniteelementanalysis
AT zhangdi biomechanicalevaluationofobliquelumbarinterbodyfusionwithvariousfixationoptionsafiniteelementanalysis
AT zhangyingze biomechanicalevaluationofobliquelumbarinterbodyfusionwithvariousfixationoptionsafiniteelementanalysis
AT shimingxin biomechanicalevaluationofobliquelumbarinterbodyfusionwithvariousfixationoptionsafiniteelementanalysis
AT mengxianzhong biomechanicalevaluationofobliquelumbarinterbodyfusionwithvariousfixationoptionsafiniteelementanalysis