Biomechanical Evaluation of the Kinematics of the Cadaver Lumbar Spine Following Disc Replacement With the Prodisc-L Prosthesis

被引:32
|
作者
Demetropoulos, Constantine K. [1 ,3 ]
Sengupta, Dilip K. [4 ]
Knaub, Mark A. [5 ]
Wiater, Brett P. [6 ]
Abjornson, Celeste [7 ]
Truumees, Eeric
Herkowitz, Harry N. [2 ]
机构
[1] William Beaumont Hosp, Res Inst, Ctr Biomech & Implant Anal, Royal Oak, MI 48073 USA
[2] William Beaumont Hosp, Dept Orthopaed Surg, Royal Oak, MI 48073 USA
[3] Univ Toledo, Coll Engn, Dept Bioengn, Toledo, OH USA
[4] Dartmouth Hitchcock Med Ctr, Lebanon, NH 03766 USA
[5] Penn State Univ, Coll Med, Hershey, PA USA
[6] Univ Washington, Med Ctr, Seattle, WA 98195 USA
[7] Synthes Spine, W Chester, PA USA
关键词
ProDisc-L; adjacent-level effects; lumbar spine; kinematics; biomechanics; INTERVERTEBRAL DISC; FIXATION DEVICES; IN-VITRO;
D O I
10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181c4eb9a
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Study Design. Biomechanical study of the ProDisc-L in a cadaveric model under pure moment loading. Objective. To determine the kinematic properties of a lumbar spine motion segment and the adjacent level following ProDisc-L disc replacement in the cadaveric spine. Summary of Background Data. Total disc replacement is intended to preserve native motion, in an attempt to prevent accelerated adjacent segment degeneration. The quality and quantity of the motion following TDR may have important consequences on the facet joints of the same motion segment, as well as the motion at the prosthetic component interface. Methods. Ten cadaveric lumbar spines were radio-graphed (L3-L5) and tested under pure moments (+10 Nm to -10 Nm) with an applied follower load (200 N). Load-deformation was tested in flexion/extension, lateral bending (LB), and axial rotation (AR). Range of Motion (ROM) data were recorded. Superior adjacent disc pressure (L3-L4) was measured using subminiature pressure transducers. The L4-L5 disc was subsequently instrumented with a ProDisc-L. Radiographs and biomechanical tests were repeated. Results. Disc replacement significantly reduced extension (ROM 2.2 degrees +/- 0.5 degrees before and 1.2 degrees +/- 0.7 degrees after instrumentation) (P = 0.001), but not flexion (ROM 5.6 degrees +/- 3.1 degrees before and 6.2 degrees +/- 1.2 degrees after) (P = 0.34). Combined flexion/extension motion was marginally reduced (P = 0.517). LB ROM (7.4 degrees +/- 2.0 degrees) was marginally reduced (P = 0.072) following instrumentation (6.2 degrees +/- 2.5 degrees), while ROM in AR (3.4 degrees +/- 1.1 degrees) was significantly increased (4.4 degrees +/- 1.2 degrees) (P = 0.001). Superior adjacent segment ROM was preserved. No significant differences in disc pressure were observed at the adjacent motion segment before (199 kPa at maximum flexion and 171 kPa at maximum extension) or after disc replacement (52 kPa and 208 kPa, respectively). Conclusion. In cadaveric spines, ROM of operated and adjacent motion segments was preserved following ProDisc-L insertion. Excision of the anterior anulus may increase laxity, which is taken up by the restoration of disc height and lordosis, at the cost of a moderate loss of flexion/extension motion. Adjacent segment kinematics were unaffected following TDR.
引用
收藏
页码:26 / 31
页数:6
相关论文
共 49 条
  • [1] In Situ Contact Analysis of the Prosthesis Components of Prodisc-L in Lumbar Spine Following Total Disc Replacement
    Chen, Wen-Ming
    Park, ChunKun
    Lee, KwonYong
    Lee, SungJae
    SPINE, 2009, 34 (20) : E716 - E723
  • [2] ProDisc-L total disc replacement
    Hannibal, Matthew
    Thomas, Derek J.
    Low, Jeffrey
    Hsu, Ken Y.
    Zucherman, James
    SPINE, 2007, 32 (21) : 2322 - 2326
  • [3] Effect of Increasing Implant Height on Lumbar Spine Kinematics and Foraminal Size Using the ProDisc-L Prosthesis
    Gaffey, John L.
    Ghanayem, Alexander J.
    Voronov, Michael L.
    Havey, Robert M.
    Carandang, Gerard
    Abjornson, Celeste
    Patwardhan, Avinash G.
    SPINE, 2010, 35 (19) : 1777 - 1782
  • [4] BIOMECHANICAL COMPARISON OF LUMBAR DISC PROSTHESES: PRODISC-L, CHARITE, AND MAVERICK DISC IMPLANT SYSTEMS
    DiAngelo, Denis J.
    Foley, Kevin T.
    Morrow, Brian
    Wong, Peter
    Kelly, Brian P.
    Kiehm, Kelly
    Sin, Anthony
    Bertagnoli, Rudolph
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE ASME SUMMER BIOENGINEERING CONFERENCE - 2009, PT A AND B, 2009, : 1235 - 1236
  • [5] Retrieval Analysis of a ProDisc-L Total Disc Replacement
    Choma, Theodore J.
    Miranda, Jose
    Siskey, Ryan
    Baxter, Ryan
    Steinbeck, Marla J.
    Kurtz, Steven M.
    JOURNAL OF SPINAL DISORDERS & TECHNIQUES, 2009, 22 (04): : 290 - 296
  • [6] Effect of intervertebral disc height on postoperative motion and outcomes after ProDisc-L lumbar disc replacement
    Yaszay, Burt
    Bendo, John A.
    Goldstein, Jeffrey A.
    Quirno, Martin
    Spivak, Jeffrey M.
    Errico, Thomas J.
    SPINE, 2008, 33 (05) : 508 - 512
  • [7] Physical capability outcomes after total disc replacement with ProDisc-L
    Sullivan, Humbert G.
    Bobenmoyer, Robert L.
    Boland, Kevin M.
    Cerniglia, Molly M.
    McHugh, Vicki L.
    Born, Hayley L.
    Mathiason, Michelle A.
    Ladwig, Nicholas R.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPINE SURGERY, 2012, 6 : 43 - 48
  • [8] Effect of intervertebral disc height on postoperative motion and outcomes after ProDisc-L lumbar disc replacement - Point of view
    Zindrick, Michael R.
    Spratt, Kevin F.
    SPINE, 2008, 33 (05) : 513 - 513
  • [9] Keel-Based Lumbar Total Disk Replacement: Prodisc-L and Prodisc-O
    Ogon, Michael
    Tuschel, Alexander
    OPERATIVE ORTHOPADIE UND TRAUMATOLOGIE, 2010, 22 (5-6): : 593 - 607
  • [10] Association of facet tropism and progressive facet arthrosis after lumbar total disc replacement using ProDisc-L®
    Myung-Hoon Shin
    Kyeong-Sik Ryu
    Jung-Woo Hur
    Jin-Sung Kim
    Chun-Kun Park
    European Spine Journal, 2013, 22 : 1717 - 1722