Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society

The Korean Neurosurgical Society (대한신경외과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The Mechanical Effect of Rod Contouring on Rod-Screw System Strength in Spine Fixation

  • Acar, Nihat (Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Ilyas Cokay Catalca Hospital) ;
  • Karakasli, Ahmet (Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Faculty of Medicine, Dokuz Eylul University) ;
  • Karaarslan, Ahmet A. (Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Sifa Hospital) ;
  • Ozcanhan, Mehmet Hilal (Department of Computer Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Dokuz Eylul University) ;
  • Ertem, Fatih (Department of Biomechanics, Health Science Institute, Dokuz Eylul University) ;
  • Erduran, Mehmet (Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Faculty of Medicine, Dokuz Eylul University)
  • Received : 2016.02.13
  • Accepted : 2016.06.08
  • Published : 2016.09.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective : Rod-screw fixation systems are widely used for spinal instrumentation. Although many biomechanical studies on rod-screw systems have been carried out, but the effects of rod contouring on the construct strength is still not very well defined in the literature. This work examines the mechanical impact of straight, $20^{\circ}$ kyphotic, and $20^{\circ}$ lordotic rod contouring on rod-screw fixation systems, by forming a corpectomy model. Methods : The corpectomy groups were prepared using ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene samples. Non-destructive loads were applied during flexion/extension and torsion testing. Spine-loading conditions were simulated by load subjections of 100 N with a velocity of $5mm\;min^{-1}$, to ensure 8.4-Nm moment. For torsional loading, the corpectomy models were subjected to rotational displacement of $0.5^{\circ}\;s^{-1}$ to an end point of $5.0^{\circ}$, in a torsion testing machine. Results : Under both flexion and extension loading conditions the stiffness values for the lordotic rod-screw system were the highest. Under torsional loading conditions, the lordotic rod-screw system exhibited the highest torsional rigidity. Conclusion : We concluded that the lordotic rod-screw system was the most rigid among the systems tested and the risk of rod and screw failure is much higher in the kyphotic rod-screw systems. Further biomechanical studies should be attempted to compare between different rod kyphotic angles to minimize the kyphotic rod failure rate and to offer a more stable and rigid rod-screw construct models for surgical application in the kyphotic vertebrae.

Keywords

References

  1. Alkalay RN, Sharpe D, Bader DL : A biomechanical analysis of an instrumented spinal fixator under torsional loads. J Biomech 38 : 865-876, 2005 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2004.04.029
  2. Baaj AA, Reyes PM, Yaqoobi AS, Uribe JS, Vale FL, Theodore N, et al. : Biomechanical advantage of the index-level pedicle screw in unstable thoracolumbar junction fractures. J Neurosurg Spine 14 : 192-197, 2011 https://doi.org/10.3171/2010.10.SPINE10222
  3. Belmont PJ Jr, Polly DW Jr, Cunningham BW, Klemme WR : The effects of hook pattern and kyphotic angulation on mechanical strength and apical rod strain in a long-segment posterior construct using a synthetic model. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 26 : 627-635, 2001 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200103150-00013
  4. Chen PQ, Lin SJ, Wu SS, So H : Mechanical performance of the new posterior spinal implant : effect of materials, connecting plate, and pedicle screw design. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 28 : 881-886, 2003
  5. Chen WJ, Lai PL, Tai CL, Chen LH, Niu CC : The effect of sagittal alignment on adjacent joint mobility after lumbar instrumentation--a biomechanical study of lumbar vertebrae in a porcine model. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 19 : 763-768, 2004 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2004.05.010
  6. Gilad R, Gandhi CD, Arginteanu MS, Moore FM, Steinberger A, Camins M : Uncorrected sagittal plane imbalance predisposes to symptomatic instrumentation failure. Spine J 8 : 911-917, 2008 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2007.10.035
  7. Karakasli A, Sekik E, Karaarslan A, Kizmazoglu C, Havitcioglu H : Are pedicular screws and lateral hook screws more resistant against pullout than conventional spinal hooks and screws in terminal vertebral segment fixation? Eklem Hastalik Cerrahisi 27 : 22-28, 2016 https://doi.org/10.5606/ehc.2016.05
  8. Kim H, Lim DH, Oh HJ, Lee KY, Lee SJ : Effects of nonlinearity in the materials used for the semi-rigid pedicle screw systems on biomechanical behaviors of the lumbar spine after surgery. Biomed Mater 6 : 055005, 2011 https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-6041/6/5/055005
  9. Kotani Y, Cunningham BW, Parker LM, Kanayama M, McAfee PC : Static and fatigue biomechanical properties of anterior thoracolumbar instrumentation systems. A synthetic testing model. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 24 : 1406-1413, 1999 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199907150-00004
  10. Lehman RA Jr, Polly DW Jr, Kuklo TR, Cunningham B, Kirk KL, Belmont PJ Jr : Straight-forward versus anatomic trajectory technique of thoracic pedicle screw fixation : a biomechanical analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 28 : 2058-2065, 2003 https://doi.org/10.1097/01.BRS.0000087743.57439.4F
  11. Liu T, Zheng WJ, Li CQ, Liu GD, Zhou Y : Design and biomechanical study of a modified pedicle screw. Chin J Traumatol 13 : 222-228, 2010
  12. Mikles MR, Asghar FA, Frankenburg EP, Scott DS, Graziano GP : Biomechanical study of lumbar pedicle screws in a corpectomy model assessing significance of screw height. J Spinal Disord Tech 17 : 272-276, 2004 https://doi.org/10.1097/01.bsd.0000095400.27687.89
  13. Okamoto T, Neo M, Fujibayashi S, Ito H, Takemoto M, Nakamura T : Mechanical implant failure in posterior cervical spine fusion. Eur Spine J 21 : 328-334, 2012 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-011-2043-8
  14. Ponnappan RK, Serhan H, Zarda B, Patel R, Albert T, Vaccaro AR : Biomechanical evaluation and comparison of polyetheretherketone rod system to traditional titanium rod fixation. Spine J 9 : 263-267, 2009 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2008.08.002
  15. Schroerlucke SR, Akbarnia BA, Pawelek JB, Salari P, Mundis GM Jr, Yazici M, et al. : How does thoracic kyphosis affect patient outcomes in growing rod surgery? Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 37 : 1303-1309, 2012 https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e318246d8a0
  16. Smith JS, Shaffrey CI, Ames CP, Demakakos J, Fu KM, Keshavarzi S, et al. : Assessment of symptomatic rod fracture after posterior instrumented fusion for adult spinal deformity. Neurosurgery 71 : 862-867, 2012 https://doi.org/10.1227/NEU.0b013e3182672aab
  17. Stanford RE, Loefler AH, Stanford PM, Walsh WR : Multiaxial pedicle screw designs : static and dynamic mechanical testing. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 29 : 367-375, 2004 https://doi.org/10.1097/01.BRS.0000092369.50397.85
  18. Sun E, Alkalay R, Vader D, Snyder BD : Preventing distal pullout of posterior spine instrumentation in thoracic hyperkyphosis : a biomechanical analysis. J Spinal Disord Tech 22 : 270-277, 2009 https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0b013e31816a6887
  19. Villa T, La Barbera L, Galbusera F : Comparative analysis of international standards for the fatigue testing of posterior spinal fixation systems. Spine J 14 : 695-704, 2014 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2013.08.032
  20. Wahba GM, Bhatia N, Bui CN, Lee KH, Lee TQ : Biomechanical evaluation of short-segment posterior instrumentation with and without crosslinks in a human cadaveric unstable thoracolumbar burst fracture model. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 35 : 278-285, 2010 https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181bda4e6
  21. Wang XY, Dai LY, Xu HZ, Chi YL : Biomechanical effect of the extent of vertebral body fracture on the thoracolumbar spine with pedicle screw fixation : an in vitro study. J Clin Neurosci 15 : 286-290, 2008 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocn.2006.12.007
  22. Xu HZ, Wang XY, Chi YL, Zhu QA, Lin Y, Huang QS, et al. : Biomechanical evaluation of a dynamic pedicle screw fixation device. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 21 : 330-336, 2006 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2005.12.004

Cited by

  1. Straight-Forward versus Bicortical Fixation Penetrating Endplate in Lumbosacral Fixation-A Biomechanical Study vol.61, pp.2, 2016, https://doi.org/10.3340/jkns.2017.0404.004
  2. Utilization of Spinal Navigation to Facilitate Hassle-Free Rod Placement during Minimally-Invasive Long-Construct Posterior Instrumentation vol.13, pp.3, 2019, https://doi.org/10.31616/asj.2018.0233
  3. Measurement of strain in the rod for lumbar pedicle screw fixation: An experimental and finite element study vol.6, pp.6, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1088/2057-1976/abc607
  4. Avoiding Radical Removal of Posterior Elements in Posterior Vertebral Column Resections: A Modified Schwab Grade 6 Osteotomy for Severe Post-Tuberculous Kyphotic Deformity vol.150, pp.None, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2021.03.114