Influence of the screw augmentation technique and a diameter increase on pedicle screw fixation in the osteoporotic spine: pullout versus fatigue testing

被引:86
|
作者
Kueny, Rebecca A. [1 ]
Kolb, Jan P. [2 ]
Lehmann, Wolfgang [2 ]
Pueschel, Klaus [3 ]
Morlock, Michael M. [1 ]
Huber, Gerd [1 ]
机构
[1] TUHH Hamburg Univ Technol, Inst Biomech, D-21073 Hamburg, Germany
[2] Univ Med Ctr Hamburg Eppendorf, Dept Trauma Hand & Reconstruct Surg, D-20246 Hamburg, Germany
[3] Univ Med Ctr Hamburg Eppendorf, Inst Forens Med, D-22529 Hamburg, Germany
关键词
Pedicle screw; Spine; Cement augmentation; Pullout; Fatigue; Toggle; CEMENT AUGMENTATION; BIOMECHANICAL ANALYSIS; COMPLICATIONS; STRENGTH; LUMBAR; INSTRUMENTATION; STABILIZATION; VERTEBRAE; REVISION;
D O I
10.1007/s00586-014-3476-7
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
For posterior spinal stabilization, loosening of pedicle screws at the bone-screw interface is a clinical complication, especially in the osteoporotic population. Axial pullout testing is the standard pre-clinical testing method for new screw designs although it has questioned clinical relevance. The aim of this study was to determine the fixation strength of three current osteoporotic fixation techniques and to investigate whether or not pullout testing results can directly relate to those of the more physiologic fatigue testing. Thirty-nine osteoporotic, human lumbar vertebrae were instrumented with pedicle screws according to four treatment groups: (1) screw only (control), (2) prefilled augmentation, (3) screw injected augmentation, and (4) unaugmented screws with an increased diameter. Toggle testing was first performed on one pedicle, using a cranial-caudal sinusoidal, cyclic (1.0 Hz) fatigue loading applied at the screw head. The initial compressive forces ranged from 25 to 75 N. Peak force increased stepwise by 25 N every 250 cycles until a 5.4-mm screw head displacement. The contralateral screw then underwent pure axial pullout (5 mm/min). When compared to the control group, screw injected augmentation increased fatigue force (27 %, p = 0.045) while prefilled augmentation reduced fatigue force (-7 %, p = 0.73). Both augmentation techniques increased pullout force compared to the control (ps < 0.04). Increasing the screw diameter by 1 mm increased pullout force (24 %, p = 0.19), fatigue force (5 %, p = 0.73), and induced the least stiffness loss (-29 %) from control. For the osteoporotic spine, screw injected augmentation showed the best biomechanical stability. Although pullout testing was more sensitive, the differences observed were not reflected in the more physiological fatigue testing, thus casting further doubt on the clinical relevance of pullout testing.
引用
收藏
页码:2196 / 2202
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Comparison of pedicle screw fixation with or without cement augmentation for treating single-segment isthmic spondylolisthesis in the osteoporotic spine
    Jian-cheng Peng
    Hui-zhi Guo
    Chen-guang Zhan
    Hua-sheng Huang
    Yan-huai Ma
    Shun-cong Zhang
    Yue-rong Xu
    Guo-ye Mo
    Yong-chao Tang
    Scientific Reports, 13
  • [22] Comparison of pedicle screw fixation with or without cement augmentation for treating single-segment isthmic spondylolisthesis in the osteoporotic spine
    Peng, Jian-cheng
    Guo, Hui-zhi
    Zhan, Chen-guang
    Huang, Hua-sheng
    Ma, Yan-huai
    Zhang, Shun-cong
    Xu, Yue-rong
    Mo, Guo-ye
    Tang, Yong-chao
    SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 2023, 13 (01)
  • [23] A Prospective Study on the Feasibility, Safety, and Efficacy of a Modified Technique to Augment the Strength of Pedicle Screw in Osteoporotic Spine Fixation
    Tandon, Vikas
    Kalidindi, Kalyan Kumar Varma
    Pacha, Sandesh
    Bhat, Mohd Rafiq
    ASIAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2020, 14 (03) : 357 - 363
  • [24] Effects of pilot hole preparation technique on pedicle screw fixation in different regions of the osteoporotic thoracic and lumbar spine
    Carmouche, JJ
    Molinari, RW
    Gerlinger, T
    Devine, J
    Patience, T
    JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY-SPINE, 2005, 3 (05) : 364 - 370
  • [25] Probe versus drill: A biomechanical evaluation of two different pedicle preparation techniques for pedicle screw fixation in human cadaveric osteoporotic spine
    Oikonomidis, Stavros
    Grevenstein, David
    Yagdiran, Ayla
    Scheyerer, Max Joseph
    Eh, Madita
    Wegmann, Kilian
    Eysel, Peer
    Sircar, Krishnan
    CLINICAL BIOMECHANICS, 2020, 75
  • [26] PEDICLE DIAMETER DETERMINED BY COMPUTED-TOMOGRAPHY - ITS RELEVANCE TO PEDICLE SCREW FIXATION IN THE LUMBAR SPINE
    BERNARD, TN
    SEIBERT, CE
    SPINE, 1992, 17 (06) : S160 - S163
  • [27] Vertebral Augmentation plus Pedicle Screw Fixation versus Vertebral Augmentation Alone in the Treatment of Osteoporotic Thoracolumbar Fractures: A Meta-Analysis
    Yan, Wenshan
    Song, Haiyu
    Cao, Weili
    Ma, Dengyue
    Sun, Ming
    WORLD NEUROSURGERY, 2025, 195
  • [28] EFFECT OF SCREW DIAMETER, INSERTION TECHNIQUE, AND BONE-CEMENT AUGMENTATION OF PEDICULAR SCREW FIXATION STRENGTH
    WITTENBERG, RH
    LEE, KS
    SHEA, M
    WHITE, AA
    HAYES, WC
    CLINICAL ORTHOPAEDICS AND RELATED RESEARCH, 1993, (296) : 278 - 287
  • [29] The Biomechanical Properties of Pedicle Screw Fixation Combined With Trajectory Bone Cement Augmentation in Osteoporotic Vertebrae
    Fan, Haitao T.
    Zhang, Renjie J.
    Shen, Cailiang L.
    Dong, Fulong L.
    Li, Yong
    Song, Peiwen W.
    Gong, Chen
    Wang, Yijin J.
    CLINICAL SPINE SURGERY, 2016, 29 (02): : 78 - 85
  • [30] The benefits of cement augmentation of pedicle screw fixation are increased in Osteoporotic bone: A finite element analysis
    Wang W.
    Baran G.R.
    Garg H.
    Betz R.R.
    Moumene M.
    Cahill P.J.
    Spine Deformity, 2014, 2 (4) : 248 - 259