RESUMO

STUDY DESIGN: A comparative biomechanical human cadaveric spine study of a dynamic fusion rod and a traditional titanium rod. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to measure and compare the biomechanical metrics associated with a dynamic fusion device, Isobar TTL Evolution, and a rigid rod. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Dynamic fusion rods may enhance arthrodesis compared with a rigid rod. Wolff's law implies that bone remodeling and growth may be enhanced through anterior column loading (AL). This is important for dynamic fusion rods because their purpose is to increase AL. METHODS: Six fresh-frozen lumbar cadaveric specimens were used. Each untreated specimen (Intact) underwent biomechanical testing. Next, each specimen had a unilateral transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion performed at L3-L4 using a cage with an integrated load cell. Pedicle screws were also placed at this time. Subsequently, the Isobar was implanted and tested, and finally, a rigid rod replaced the Isobar in the same pedicle screw arrangement. RESULTS: In terms of range of motion, the Isobar performed comparably to the rigid rod and there was no statistical difference found between Isobar and rigid rod. There was a significant difference between the intact and rigid rod and also between intact and Isobar conditions in flexion extension. For interpedicular displacement, there was a significant increase in flexion extension (P=0.017) for the Isobar compared with the rigid rod. Isobar showed increased AL under axial compression compared with the rigid rod (P=0.024). CONCLUSIONS: Isobar provided comparable stabilization to a rigid rod when using range of motion as the metric, however, AL was increased because of the greater interpedicular displacement of dynamic rod compared with a rigid rod. By increasing interpedicular displacement and AL, it potentially brings clinical benefit to procedures relying on arthrodesis.

Assuntos

Vértebras Lombares/fisiologia , Parafusos Pediculares , Amplitude de Movimento Articular/fisiologia , Fusão Vertebral/instrumentação , Fusão Vertebral/métodos , Fenômenos Biomecânicos , Cadáver , Humanos , Fixadores Internos , Região Lombossacral , Rotação

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Lumbar interbody fusion is a common treatment for a variety of spinal pathologies. It has been hypothesized that insufficient mechanical loading of the interbody graft can prevent proper fusion of the joint. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the mechanical stability and anterior column loading sharing characteristics of a posterior dynamic system compared to titanium rods in an anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) model. METHODS: Range of motion, interpedicular kinematics and interbody graft loading were measured in human cadaveric lumbar segments tested under a pure moment flexibility testing protocol. RESULTS: Both systems provided significant fixation compared to the intact condition and to an interbody spacer alone in flexion extension and lateral bending. No significant differences in fixation were detected between the devices. A significant decrease in graft loading was detected in flexion for the titanium rod treatment compared to spacer alone. No significant differences in graft loading were detected between the spacer alone and posterior dynamic system or between the posterior dynamic system and the titanium rod. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study indicate that the posterior dynamic system provides similar fixation compared to that of a titanium rod, however, studies designed to evaluate the efficacy of fixation in a cadaver model may not be sufficiently powered to establish differences in load sharing using the techniques described here.

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Disc protrusion has been proposed to be a possible cause of both pain and stenosis in the lower spine. No previous study has described the amount of disc occlusion of the spinal canal and intervertebral foramen that occurs under different loading conditions. The objective of this study was to quantitatively assess the percent occlusion of the spinal canal and intervertebral foramen by disc bulge under different loading conditions. METHODS: Spinal canal depth and foraminal width were measured on computed tomography-scanned images of 7 human lumbar spine specimens. In vitro disc bulge measurements were completed by use of a previously described method in which single functional spinal units were subjected to 3 separate load protocols in a spine test machine and disc bulge was recorded with an optoelectric motion system that tracked active light-emitting diodes placed on the posterior and posterolateral aspects of the intervertebral disc. Occlusion was defined as percentage of encroachment into area of interest by maximum measured disc bulge at corresponding point of interest (the spinal canal is at the posterior point; the intervertebral foramen is at the posterolateral point). RESULTS: The mean spinal canal depth and mean foraminal width were 19 4 ± mm and 5 ± 2 mm, respectively. Mean spinal canal occlusion under a 250-N axial load, ± 2.5 Nm of flexion/extension, and ± 2.5 Nm of lateral bend was 2.5% ± 1.9%, 2.5% ± 1.6%, and 1.5% ± 0.8%, respectively. Mean intervertebral foramen occlusion under a 250-N axial load, ± 2.5 Nm of flexion/extension, and ± 2.5 Nm of lateral bend was 7.8% ± 4.7%, 9.5% ± 5.7%, and 11.3% ± 6.2%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Percent occlusion of the spinal canal and intervertebral foramen is dependent on magnitude and direction of load. Exiting neural elements at the location of the intervertebral foramen are the most vulnerable to impingement and generation of pain.