These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed


  • Title: Biomechanical Analysis of an Expandable Lumbar Interbody Spacer.
    Author: Soriano-Baron H, Newcomb AGUS, Malhotra D, Palma AE, Martinez-Del-Campo E, Crawford NR, Theodore N, Kelly BP, Kaibara T.
    Journal: World Neurosurg; 2018 Jun; 114():e616-e623. PubMed ID: 29548956.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: Recently developed expandable interbody spacers are widely accepted in spinal surgery; however, the resulting biomechanical effects of their use have not yet been fully studied. We analyzed the biomechanical effects of an expandable polyetheretherketone interbody spacer inserted through a bilateral posterior approach with and without different modalities of posterior augmentation. METHODS: Biomechanical nondestructive flexibility testing was performed in 7 human cadaveric lumbar (L2-L5) specimens followed by axial compressive loading. Each specimen was tested under 6 conditions: 1) intact, 2) bilateral L3-L4 cortical screw/rod (CSR) alone, 3) WaveD alone, 4) WaveD + CSR, 5) WaveD + bilateral L3-L4 pedicle screw/rod (PSR), and 6) WaveD + CSR/PSR, where CSR/PSR was a hybrid construct comprising bilateral cortical-level L3 and pedicle-level L4 screws interconnected by rods. RESULTS: The range of motion (ROM) with the interbody spacer alone decreased significantly compared with the intact condition during flexion-extension (P = 0.02) but not during lateral bending or axial rotation (P ≥ 0.19). The addition of CSR or PSR to the interbody spacer alone condition significantly decreased the ROM compared with the interbody spacer alone (P ≤ 0.002); and WaveD + CSR, WaveD + PSR, and WaveD + CSR/PSR (hybrid) (P ≥ 0.29) did not differ. The axial compressive stiffness (resistance to change in foraminal height during compressive loading) with the interbody spacer alone did not differ from the intact condition (P = 0.96), whereas WaveD + posterior instrumentation significantly increased compressive stiffness compared with the intact condition and the interbody spacer alone (P ≤ 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The WaveD alone significantly reduced ROM during flexion-extension while maintaining the axial compressive stiffness. CSR, PSR, and CSR/PSR hybrid constructs were all effective in augmenting the expandable interbody spacer system and improving its stability.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]