. 2022 Nov 18.
doi: 10.1002/jbm.b.35191.
Online ahead of print.
Affiliations
Affiliations
- 1 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, The University of Tokyo Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
- 2 Division of Science for Joint Reconstruction, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
- 3 Medical R&D Center, KYOCERA Corporation, Shiga, Japan.
Item in Clipboard
Yasushi Oshima et al.
J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater.
.
Display options
Format
. 2022 Nov 18.
doi: 10.1002/jbm.b.35191.
Online ahead of print.
Affiliations
- 1 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, The University of Tokyo Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
- 2 Division of Science for Joint Reconstruction, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
- 3 Medical R&D Center, KYOCERA Corporation, Shiga, Japan.
Item in Clipboard
Display options
Format
Abstract
Rigid spinal fusion with instrumentation has been widely applied in treating degenerative spinal disorders and has shown excellent and stable surgical results. However, adjacent segment pathology or implants’ loosening could be problematic due to the spine’s segmental fusion. Therefore, this study verified a novel concept for posterior stabilization with polyethylene inserts inside a pedicle screw assembly using bone models. We observed that although the gripping capacity of the dynamic pedicle screw system using a tensile and compression tester was less than half that of the rigid pedicle screw system, the flexion-extension moment of the dynamic pedicle screws was significantly lower than that of the rigid pedicle screws. Furthermore, while the bending force of the rigid pedicle screw assembly increased linearly with an increase in the bending angle throughout the test, that of the dynamic pedicle screw assembly also increased linearly until a bending angle of 2.5° was reached. However, this angle decreased at a bending angle of more than 2.5°. Additionally, the fatigue test of 1.0 × 106 cycles showed that the pull-out force of the dynamic pedicle screws from two different polyurethane foam blocks was significantly higher than that of the rigid pedicle screws. Therefore, based on our results, we propose that the device can be applied in clinical cases to reduce screw loosening and adjacent segment pathology.
Keywords:
adjacent segment; loosening; mobile; posterior stabilization; spinal fusion.
© 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC.
References
REFERENCES
-
-
Rienmuller AC, Krieg SM, Schmidt FA, Meyer EL, Meyer B. Reoperation rates and risk factors for revision 4 years after dynamic stabilization of the lumbar spine. Spine J. 2019;19(1):113-120.
-
-
-
Galbusera F, Volkheimer D, Reitmaier S, Berger-Roscher N, Kienle A, Wilke HJ. Pedicle screw loosening: a clinically relevant complication? Eur Spine J. 2015;24(5):1005-1016.
-
-
-
Kabir SM, Gupta SR, Casey AT. Lumbar interspinous spacers: a systematic review of clinical and biomechanical evidence. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010;35(25):E1499-E1506.
-
-
-
Chamoli U, Diwan AD, Tsafnat N. Pedicle screw-based posterior dynamic stabilizers for degenerative spine: in vitro biomechanical testing and clinical outcomes. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2014;102(9):3324-3340.
-
-
-
Huang W, Chang Z, Song R, Zhou K, Yu X. Non-fusion procedure using PEEK rod systems for lumbar degenerative diseases: clinical experience with a 2-year follow-up. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2016;17:53.
-
Cite