Cargando…
Comparison of three different screw trajectories in osteoporotic vertebrae: a biomechanical investigation
BACKGROUND: Pedicle screw insertion in osteoporotic patients is challenging. Achieving more screw-cortical bone purchase and invasiveness minimization, the cortical bone trajectory and the midline cortical techniques represent alternatives to traditional pedicle screws. This study compares the fatig...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8101169/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33952236 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-021-04254-0 |
_version_ | 1783688917823782912 |
---|---|
author | Jarvers, J.-S. Schleifenbaum, S. Pfeifle, C. Oefner, C. Edel, M. von der Höh, N. Heyde, C.-E. |
author_facet | Jarvers, J.-S. Schleifenbaum, S. Pfeifle, C. Oefner, C. Edel, M. von der Höh, N. Heyde, C.-E. |
author_sort | Jarvers, J.-S. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Pedicle screw insertion in osteoporotic patients is challenging. Achieving more screw-cortical bone purchase and invasiveness minimization, the cortical bone trajectory and the midline cortical techniques represent alternatives to traditional pedicle screws. This study compares the fatigue behavior and fixation strength of the cement-augmented traditional trajectory (TT), the cortical bone trajectory (CBT), and the midline cortical (MC). METHODS: Ten human cadaveric spine specimens (L1 - L5) were examined. The average age was 86.3 ± 7.2 years. CT scans were provided for preoperative planning. CBT and MC were implanted by using the patient-specific 3D-printed placement guide (MySpine®, Medacta International), TT were implanted freehand. All ten cadaveric specimens were randomized to group A (CBT vs. MC) or group B (MC vs. TT). Each screw was loaded for 10,000 cycles. The failure criterion was doubling of the initial screw displacement resulting from the compressive force (60 N) at the first cycle, the stop criterion was a doubling of the initial screw displacement. After dynamic testing, screws were pulled out axially at 5 mm/min to determine their remaining fixation strength. RESULTS: The mean pull-out forces did not differ significantly. Concerning the fatigue performance, only one out of ten MC of group A failed prematurely due to loosening after 1500 cycles (L3). Five CBT already loosened during the first 500 cycles. The mean displacement was always lower in the MC. In group B, all TT showed no signs of failure or loosening. Three MC failed already after 26 cycles, 1510 cycles or 2144 cycles. The TT showed always a lower mean displacement. In the subsequent pull-out tests, the remaining mean fixation strength of the MC (449.6 ± 298.9 N) was slightly higher compared to the mean pull-out force of the CBT (401.2 ± 261.4 N). However, MC (714.5 ± 488.0 N) were inferior to TT (990.2 ± 451.9 N). CONCLUSION: The current study demonstrated that cement-augmented TT have the best fatigue and pull-out characteristics in osteoporotic lumbar vertebrae, followed by the MC and CBT. MC represent a promising alternative in osteoporotic bone if cement augmentation should be avoided. Using the patient-specific placement guide contributes to the improvement of screws’ biomechanical properties. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12891-021-04254-0. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8101169 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-81011692021-05-06 Comparison of three different screw trajectories in osteoporotic vertebrae: a biomechanical investigation Jarvers, J.-S. Schleifenbaum, S. Pfeifle, C. Oefner, C. Edel, M. von der Höh, N. Heyde, C.-E. BMC Musculoskelet Disord Research Article BACKGROUND: Pedicle screw insertion in osteoporotic patients is challenging. Achieving more screw-cortical bone purchase and invasiveness minimization, the cortical bone trajectory and the midline cortical techniques represent alternatives to traditional pedicle screws. This study compares the fatigue behavior and fixation strength of the cement-augmented traditional trajectory (TT), the cortical bone trajectory (CBT), and the midline cortical (MC). METHODS: Ten human cadaveric spine specimens (L1 - L5) were examined. The average age was 86.3 ± 7.2 years. CT scans were provided for preoperative planning. CBT and MC were implanted by using the patient-specific 3D-printed placement guide (MySpine®, Medacta International), TT were implanted freehand. All ten cadaveric specimens were randomized to group A (CBT vs. MC) or group B (MC vs. TT). Each screw was loaded for 10,000 cycles. The failure criterion was doubling of the initial screw displacement resulting from the compressive force (60 N) at the first cycle, the stop criterion was a doubling of the initial screw displacement. After dynamic testing, screws were pulled out axially at 5 mm/min to determine their remaining fixation strength. RESULTS: The mean pull-out forces did not differ significantly. Concerning the fatigue performance, only one out of ten MC of group A failed prematurely due to loosening after 1500 cycles (L3). Five CBT already loosened during the first 500 cycles. The mean displacement was always lower in the MC. In group B, all TT showed no signs of failure or loosening. Three MC failed already after 26 cycles, 1510 cycles or 2144 cycles. The TT showed always a lower mean displacement. In the subsequent pull-out tests, the remaining mean fixation strength of the MC (449.6 ± 298.9 N) was slightly higher compared to the mean pull-out force of the CBT (401.2 ± 261.4 N). However, MC (714.5 ± 488.0 N) were inferior to TT (990.2 ± 451.9 N). CONCLUSION: The current study demonstrated that cement-augmented TT have the best fatigue and pull-out characteristics in osteoporotic lumbar vertebrae, followed by the MC and CBT. MC represent a promising alternative in osteoporotic bone if cement augmentation should be avoided. Using the patient-specific placement guide contributes to the improvement of screws’ biomechanical properties. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12891-021-04254-0. BioMed Central 2021-05-05 /pmc/articles/PMC8101169/ /pubmed/33952236 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-021-04254-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/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/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://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 Jarvers, J.-S. Schleifenbaum, S. Pfeifle, C. Oefner, C. Edel, M. von der Höh, N. Heyde, C.-E. Comparison of three different screw trajectories in osteoporotic vertebrae: a biomechanical investigation |
title | Comparison of three different screw trajectories in osteoporotic vertebrae: a biomechanical investigation |
title_full | Comparison of three different screw trajectories in osteoporotic vertebrae: a biomechanical investigation |
title_fullStr | Comparison of three different screw trajectories in osteoporotic vertebrae: a biomechanical investigation |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of three different screw trajectories in osteoporotic vertebrae: a biomechanical investigation |
title_short | Comparison of three different screw trajectories in osteoporotic vertebrae: a biomechanical investigation |
title_sort | comparison of three different screw trajectories in osteoporotic vertebrae: a biomechanical investigation |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8101169/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33952236 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-021-04254-0 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT jarversjs comparisonofthreedifferentscrewtrajectoriesinosteoporoticvertebraeabiomechanicalinvestigation AT schleifenbaums comparisonofthreedifferentscrewtrajectoriesinosteoporoticvertebraeabiomechanicalinvestigation AT pfeiflec comparisonofthreedifferentscrewtrajectoriesinosteoporoticvertebraeabiomechanicalinvestigation AT oefnerc comparisonofthreedifferentscrewtrajectoriesinosteoporoticvertebraeabiomechanicalinvestigation AT edelm comparisonofthreedifferentscrewtrajectoriesinosteoporoticvertebraeabiomechanicalinvestigation AT vonderhohn comparisonofthreedifferentscrewtrajectoriesinosteoporoticvertebraeabiomechanicalinvestigation AT heydece comparisonofthreedifferentscrewtrajectoriesinosteoporoticvertebraeabiomechanicalinvestigation |