Evaluation of Two Novel Integrated Stand-Alone Spacer Designs Compared with Anterior and Anterior-Posterior Single-Level Lumbar Fusion Techniques: An Biomechanical Investigation

Study DesignIn vitro biomechanical investigation.PurposeTo compare the biomechanics of integrated three-screw and four-screw anterior interbody spacer devices and traditional techniques for treatment of degenerative disc disease.Overview of LiteratureBiomechanical literature describes investigations of operative techniques and integrated devices with four dual-stacked, diverging interbody screws; four alternating, converging screws through a polyether-ether-ketone (PEEK) spacer; and four converging screws threaded within the PEEK spacer. Conflicting reports on the stability of stand-alone devices and the influence of device design on biomechanics warrant investigation.MethodsFourteen cadaveric lumbar spines were divided randomly into two equal groups (n=7). Each spine was tested intact, after discectomy (injured), and with PEEK interbody spacer alone (S), anterior lumbar plate and spacer (AP+S), bilateral pedicle screws and spacer (BPS+S), circumferential fixation with spacer and anterior lumbar plate supplemented with BPS, and three-screw (SA3s) or four-screw (SA4s) integrated spacers. Constructs were tested in flexion-extension (FE), lateral bending (LB), and axial rotation (AR). Researchers performed one-way analysis of variance and independent t-testing (p≤0.05).ResultsInstrumented constructs showed significantly decreased motion compared with intact except the spacer-alone construct in FE and AR (p≤0.05). SA3s showed significantly decreased range of motion (ROM) compared with AP+S in LB (p≤0.05) and comparable ROM in FE and AR. The three-screw design increased stability in FE and LB with no significant differences between integrated spacers or between integrated spacers and BPS+S in all loading modes.ConclusionsIntegrated spacers provided fixation statistically equivalent to traditional techniques. Comparison of three-screw and four-screw integrated anterior lumbar interbody fusion spacers revealed no significant differences, but the longer, larger-diameter interbody spacer with three-screw design increased stabilization in FE and LB; the diverging four-screw design showed marginal improvement during AR

Assessment of Surgical Procedural Time, Pedicle Screw Accuracy, and Clinician Radiation Exposure of a Novel Robotic Navigation System Compared With Conventional Open and Percutaneous Freehand Techniques: A Cadaveric Investigation

STUDY DESIGN: Cadaveric study. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate accuracy, radiation exposure, and surgical time of a new robotic-assisted navigation (RAN) platform compared with freehand techniques in conventional open and percutaneous procedures. METHODS: Ten board-certified surgeons inserted 16 pedicle screws at T10-L5 (n = 40 per technique) in 10 human cadaveric torsos. Pedicle screws were inserted with (1) conventional MIS technique (L2-L5, patient left pedicles), (2) MIS RAN (L2-L5, patient right pedicles), (3) conventional open technique (T10-L1, patient left pedicles), and (4) open RAN (T10-L1, patient right pedicles). Output included (1) operative time, (2) number of fluoroscopic images, and (3) screw accuracy. RESULTS: In the MIS group, compared with the freehand technique, RAN allowed for use of larger screws (diameter: 6.6 ± 0.6 mm vs 6.3 ± 0.5 mm; length: 50.3 ± 4.1 mm vs 46.9 ± 3.5 mm), decreased the number of breaches \u3e2 mm (0 vs 7), fewer fluoroscopic images (0 ± 0 vs 108.3 ± 30.9), and surgical procedure time per screw (3.6 ± 0.4 minutes vs 7.6 ± 2.0 minutes) (all CONCLUSION: RAN significantly improved accuracy and decreased radiation exposure in comparison to freehand techniques in both conventional open and percutaneous surgical procedures in cadavers. RAN significantly increased setup time compared with both conventional procedures

Biomechanical Assessment of Stabilization of Simulated Type II Odontoid Fracture with Case Study

STUDY DESIGN: Researchers created a proper type II dens fracture (DF) and quantified a novel current posterior fixation technique with spacers at C1-C2. A clinical case study supplements this biomechanical analysis. PURPOSE: Researchers explored their hypothesis that spacers combined with posterior instrumentation (PI) reduce range of motion significantly, possibly leading to better fusion outcomes. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: Literature shows that the atlantoaxial joint is unique in allowing segmental rotary motion, enabling head turning. With no intervertebral discs at these joints, multiple ligaments bind the axis to the skull base and to the atlas; an intact odontoid (dens) enhances stability. The most common traumatic injury at these strong ligaments is a type II odontoid fracture. METHODS: Each of seven specimens (C0-C3) was tested on a custom-built six-degrees-of-freedom spine simulator with constructs of intact state, type II DF, C1-C2 PI, PI with joint capsulotomy (PIJC), PI with spacers (PIS) at C1-C2, and spacers alone (SA). A bending moment of 2.0 Nm (1.5°/sec) was applied in flexion-extension (FE), lateral bending (LB), and axial rotation (AR). One-way analysis of variance with repeated measures was performed. RESULTS: DF increased motion to 320%, 429%, and 120% versus intact (FE, LB, and AR, respectively). PI significantly reduced motion to 41%, 21%, and 8%. PIJC showed negligible changes from PI. PIS reduced motion to 16%, 14%, and 3%. SA decreased motion to 64%, 24%, and 54%. Reduced motion facilitated solid fusion in an 89-year-old female patient within 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: Type II odontoid fractures can lead to acute or chronic instability. Current fixation techniques use C1-C2 PI or an anterior dens screw. Addition of spacers alongside PI led to increased biomechanical rigidity over intact motion and may offer an alternative to established surgical fixation techniques

Stabilizing effect of the rib cage on adjacent segment motion following thoracolumbar posterior fixation of the human thoracic cadaveric spine: A biomechanical study.

BACKGROUND: Although the rib cage provides substantial stability to the thoracic spine, few biomechanical studies have incorporated it into their testing model, and no studies have determined the influence of the rib cage on adjacent segment motion of long fusion constructs. The present biomechanical study aimed to determine the mechanical contribution of the intact rib cage during the testing of instrumented specimens. METHODS: A cyclic loading (CL) protocol with instrumentation (T4-L2 pedicle screw-rod fixation) was conducted on five thoracic spines (C7-L2) with intact rib cages. Range of motion (±5 Nm pure moment) in flexion-extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation was captured for intact ribs, partial ribs, and no ribs conditions. Comparisons at the supra-adjacent (T2-T3), adjacent (T3-T4), first instrumented (T4-T5), and second instrumented (T5-T6) levels were made between conditions (P ≤ 0.05). FINDINGS: A trend of increased motion at the adjacent level was seen for partial ribs and no ribs in all 3 bending modes. This trend was also observed at the supra-adjacent level for both conditions. No significant changes in motion compared to the intact ribs condition were seen at the first and second instrumented levels (P \u3e 0.05). INTERPRETATION: The segment adjacent to long fusion constructs, which may appear more grossly unstable when tested in the disarticulated spine, is reinforced by the rib cage. In order to avoid overestimating adjacent level motion, when testing the effectiveness of surgical techniques of the thoracic spine, inclusion of the rib cage may be warranted to better reflect clinical circumstances

Impaction grafting of lumbar pedicle defects: a biomechanical study of a novel technique for pedicle screw revision.

OBJECTIVE: The two most common revision options available for the management of loose pedicle screws are larger-diameter screws and cement augmentation into the vertebral body for secondary fixation. An alternative revision method is impaction grafting (pedicoplasty) of the failed pedicle screw track. This technique uses the impaction of corticocancellous bone into the pedicle and vertebral body through a series of custom funnels to reconstitute a new pedicle wall and a neomedullary canal. The goal of this study was to compare the biomechanics of screws inserted after pedicoplasty (impaction grafting) of a pedicle defect to those of an upsized screw and a cement-augmented screw. METHODS: For this biomechanical cadaveric study the investigators used 10 vertebral bodies (L1-5) that were free of metastatic disease or primary bone disease. Following initial screw insertion, each screw was subjected to a pullout force that was applied axially along the screw trajectory at 5 mm per minute until failure. Each specimen was instrumented with a pedicoplasty revision using the original screw diameter, and on the contralateral side either a fenestrated screw with cement augmentation or a screw upsized by 1 mm was inserted in a randomized fashion. These revisions were then pulled out using the previously mentioned methods. RESULTS: Initial screw pullout values for the paired upsized screw and pedicoplasty were 717 ± 511 N and 774 ± 414 N, respectively (p = 0.747) (n = 14). Revised pullout values for the paired upsized screw and pedicoplasty were 775 ± 461 N and 762 ± 320 N, respectively (p = 0.932). Initial pullout values for the paired cement augmentation and pedicoplasty were 792 ± 434 N and 880 ± 558 N, respectively (p = 0.649). Revised pullout values for the paired cement augmentation and pedicoplasty were 1159 ± 300 N and 687 ± 213 N, respectively (p \u3c 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Pedicle defects are difficult to manage. Reconstitution of the pedicle and creation of a neomedullary canal appears to be possible through the use of pedicoplasty. Biomechanically, screws that have been used in pedicoplasty have equivalent pullout strength to an upsized screw, and have greater insertional torques than those with the same diameter that have not been used in pedicoplasty, yet they are not superior to cement augmentation. This study suggests that although cement augmentation appears to have superior pullout force, the novel pedicoplasty technique offers promise as a viable biological revision option for the management of failed pedicle screws compared with the option of standard upsized screws in a cadaveric model. These findings will ultimately need to be further assessed in a clinical setting