Effect of different fixation methods on biomechanical property of cervical vertebral body replacement and fusion

被引:4
|
作者
Zhang, Dong-Xiang [1 ]
Guo, Li-Xin [1 ]
机构
[1] Northeastern Univ, Sch Mech Engn & Automat, Shenyang 110819, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
Vertebral body replacement and fusion; Anterior fixation; Self-stabilizing fixation; Anterior-posterior fixation; Cervical spine; Finite element; LUMBAR SPINE; MECHANICAL-PROPERTIES; STRUCTURAL-PROPERTIES; EXPANDABLE CAGES; FLEXION; DEGENERATION; CORRIDORS; STRENGTHS; MODEL; LOAD;
D O I
10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2022.105864
中图分类号
R318 [生物医学工程];
学科分类号
0831 ;
摘要
Background: The main purpose of this study was to examine the effect of different fixation methods (anterior fixation, self-stabilizing fixation and anterior-posterior fixation) on biomechanical property of vertebral body replacement and fusion.Methods: Three finite element models of cervical vertebral body replacement and fusion were established. The implanted models included artificial vertebral body and fixation system, and the loads imposed on the models included 75 N compression load and 1 Nm moment load.Findings: For anterior-posterior fixation, the cervical load was mainly transmitted by the posterior pedicle screw and rod (more than 50%), and the stress shielding problem was the most significant than the self-stabilizing and anterior fixation. Self-stabilizing fixation was more helpful to the fusion of implant and vertebrae, but the higher risk of vertebral body collapse was worthy of attention if the cervical spine with osteoporosis. The stress of bone was mainly concentrated around the screw hole. The maximum stress (20.03 MPa) was lower than the yield stress of cortical bone and the possibility of fracture around the fixation device of cervical spine was low. The anterior fixation could meet the requirement of vertebral body replacement and fusion, and the addition of posterior pedicle screws and rods might obtain better treatment in cases of severe spine injury or osteoporosis.Interpretation: The findings of this study may provide guidance on clinical treatments for choosing more appropriate fixation methods for different patients.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Multilevel segmental interbody fusion versus vertebral body replacement. Comparison of two operative methods
    Daentzer, D.
    Bianchi, N.
    Boeker, D. -K.
    Deinsberger, W.
    ORTHOPADE, 2014, 43 (02): : 156 - 164
  • [22] Biomechanical comparison of the end plate design of three vertebral body replacement systems
    Rainer Penzkofer
    Stefan Hofberger
    Ulrich Spiegl
    Christoph Schilling
    Robert Schultz
    Peter Augat
    Oliver Gonschorek
    Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, 2011, 131 : 1253 - 1259
  • [23] Biomechanical comparison of the end plate design of three vertebral body replacement systems
    Penzkofer, Rainer
    Hofberger, Stefan
    Spiegl, Ulrich
    Schilling, Christoph
    Schultz, Robert
    Augat, Peter
    Gonschorek, Oliver
    ARCHIVES OF ORTHOPAEDIC AND TRAUMA SURGERY, 2011, 131 (09) : 1253 - 1259
  • [24] Posterior occipito cervical decompression with fixation and fusion in Cranio vertebral junction compression
    Rehman, Lal
    Bokhari, Iram
    Afzal, Ali
    Ahmad, Shakeel
    PAKISTAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCES, 2017, 33 (05) : 1194 - 1198
  • [25] Complications associated with cervical vertebral body replacement with expandable titanium cages
    Brenke, Christopher
    Fischer, Sebastian
    Carolus, Anne
    Schmieder, Kirsten
    Ening, Genevieve
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NEUROSCIENCE, 2016, 32 : 35 - 40
  • [26] Biomechanical study of different fixation methods for posterior malleolus fracture
    Sun, Dandan
    Shi, Gengqiang
    Du, Kewei
    COMPUTER METHODS IN BIOMECHANICS AND BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING, 2024, 27 (09) : 1141 - 1149
  • [27] Biomechanical evaluation of different fixation methods for tibial eminence fractures
    Eggers, Anne Kathleen
    Becker, Christoph
    Weimann, Andre
    Herbort, Mirco
    Zantop, Thore
    Raschke, Michael J.
    Petersen, Wolf
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2007, 35 (03): : 404 - 410
  • [28] An improved vertebral body replacement for the thoracolumbar spine.: A biomechanical in vitro test on human lumbar vertebral bodies
    Reinhold, M.
    Schmoelz, W.
    Canto, F.
    Krappinger, D.
    Blauth, M.
    Knop, C.
    UNFALLCHIRURG, 2007, 110 (04): : 327 - 333
  • [29] Effect of an orthosis on the loads acting on a vertebral body replacement
    Rohlmann, Antonius
    Zander, Thomas
    Graichen, Friedmar
    Bergmann, Georg
    CLINICAL BIOMECHANICS, 2013, 28 (05) : 490 - 494
  • [30] Biomechanical studies of transthoracic vertebral body replacement with autologous bone grafts (fibula and rib)
    Kaden, B
    Koch, W
    VarchminSchultheiss, K
    Wunsch, M
    Fuhrmann, G
    NEUROSURGICAL REVIEW, 1996, 19 (01) : 17 - 21