Cervical spine fusion: Biomechanics of a three-level cadaver model comparing anterior plate versus stand-alone cage

被引:1
|
作者
McGuire R. [1 ]
Al-Barghouthi A. [2 ]
Dale W. [1 ]
Travascio F. [2 ,3 ,4 ]
Latta L. [2 ,3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Rehabilitation, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, MS
[2] Max Biedermann Institute for Biomechanics, Mount Sinai Medical Center, Miami Beach, FL
[3] Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Miami, Coral Gables, FL
[4] Department of Orthopaedics, University of Miami, Miami, FL
关键词
Anterior cage; Bone resorption; Cage-endplate pressure; Contact area;
D O I
10.1615/JLongTermEffMedImplants.2020035807
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Study Design—Biomechanical cadaveric study. Objective—Long anterior cervical plate and cage (APC) constructs have a risk of pseudarthrosis with minor bone resorp-tion. Stand-alone cages (SACs) allow settling. The biomechanics of SAC have been investigated, but not multilevel, compression screw SAC. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the biomechanical safety of three-level SAC versus APC. Methods—Discectomies at three levels of five human cadaver spines (T1-C3) were fixed with SAC. A 0.18 mm thick shim was interposed between the cage and the superior endplate, and a pressure transducer map was placed between the cage and the inferior endplate. Tests were performed in flexion-extension and then repeated after removing the shims to simulate minor bone resorption. Subsequently, APC was applied and experiments were repeated. The pressure between each cage and endplate and motion of the implants were measured. Results—The range of motion (ROM) of SAC and APC constructs were comparable. The contact area and pressure between cage and endplate did not significantly change during motion with SAC. Shim removal did not significantly affect ROM, contact area, or average pressure measures. For APC, both contact area and pressure decreased from extension to flexion. Shim removal caused a significant loss of contact area and pressure. Conclusions—SAC provided comparable rigidity to the conventional APC construct while maintaining compression at the endplate-cage interface throughout flexion-extension and after minor bone resorption. © 2020 by Begell House, Inc. www.begellhouse.com.
引用
收藏
页码:135 / 140
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Comparative Study of Functional Outcome of Anterior Cervical Decompression and Interbody Fusion With Tricortical Stand-Alone Iliac Crest Autograft Versus Stand-Alone Polyetheretherketone Cage in Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy
    Sharma, Ayush
    Kishore, Hari
    Singh, Vijay
    Abdelgawaad, Ahmed Shawky
    Sinha, Shorabh
    Kamble, Prashant Chandrakant
    Jorule, Kailash
    Agrawal, Romit
    Mathapati, Sumit
    Deepak, Priyank
    GLOBAL SPINE JOURNAL, 2018, 8 (08) : 860 - 865
  • [22] The Efficacy of Plate Construct Augmentation Versus Cage Alone in Anterior Cervical Fusion
    Song, Kyung-Jin
    Taghavi, Cyrus E.
    Lee, Kwang-Bok
    Song, Ji-Hoon
    Eun, Jong-Pil
    SPINE, 2009, 34 (26) : 2886 - 2892
  • [23] A Clinical Comparison of Anterior Cervical Plates Versus Stand-Alone Intervertebral Fusion Devices for Single-Level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Procedures
    Panchal, Ripul R.
    Kim, Kee D.
    Eastlack, Robert
    Lopez, John
    Clavenna, Andrew
    Brooks, Daina M.
    Joshua, Gita
    WORLD NEUROSURGERY, 2017, 99 : 630 - 637
  • [24] Comparison of Surgical Outcomes, Narcotics Utilization, and Costs After an Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Stand-alone Cage Versus Anterior Plating
    Tabaraee, Ehsan
    Ahn, Junyoung
    Bohl, Daniel D.
    Collins, Michael J.
    Massel, Dustin H.
    Aboushaala, Khaled
    Singh, Kern
    CLINICAL SPINE SURGERY, 2017, 30 (09): : E1201 - E1205
  • [25] The Outcomes of Revision Anterior Cervical Decompression and Fusion Using a Stand-Alone Implant Versus Traditional Interbody Polyetheretherketone Cage, Titanium Plate, and Screw Instrumentation
    Alhammoud, Abduljabbar
    Korytkowski, Paul D.
    Lavelle, William F.
    Tallarico, Richard A.
    CUREUS JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCE, 2023, 15 (11)
  • [26] Letter to the Editor: A Randomized Control Trail Comparing Local Autografts and Allografts in Single Level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Using a Stand-Alone Cage
    Rawat, Sanjay Singh
    Kumar, Vishal
    ASIAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2022, 16 (02) : 311 - 312
  • [27] Locking stand-alone cage versus anterior plate construct in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials
    Zhao, Yachao
    Yang, Sidong
    Huo, Yachong
    Li, Zhaohui
    Yang, Dalong
    Ding, Wenyuan
    EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2020, 29 (11) : 2734 - 2744
  • [28] Locking stand-alone cage versus anterior plate construct in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials
    Yachao Zhao
    Sidong Yang
    Yachong Huo
    Zhaohui Li
    Dalong Yang
    Wenyuan Ding
    European Spine Journal, 2020, 29 : 2734 - 2744
  • [29] Comparison of plate-cage construct and stand-alone anchored spacer in the surgical treatment of three-level cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a preliminary clinical study
    Shi, Sheng
    Liu, Zu-De
    Li, Xin-Feng
    Qian, Lie
    Zhong, Gui-Bin
    Chen, Fang-Jing
    SPINE JOURNAL, 2015, 15 (09): : 1973 - 1980
  • [30] A Matched Cohort Analysis Comparing Stand-Alone Cages and Anterior Cervical Plates Used for Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion
    Overley, Samuel C.
    Merrill, Robert K.
    Leven, Dante M.
    Meaike, Joshua J.
    Kumar, Abhishek
    Qureshi, Sheeraz A.
    GLOBAL SPINE JOURNAL, 2017, 7 (05) : 394 - 399