Top

European Spine Journal

Published in:

01-11-2014 | Original Article

Circumferential dynamic stabilization of the lumbar spine: a biomechanical analysis

Authors: Wolfram Käfer, Balkan Cakir, Stefan Midderhoff, Heiko Reichel, Hans-Joachim Wilke

Published in: European Spine Journal | Issue 11/2014

Abstract

Purpose

To assess segmental angulation and mobility following implantation of the Charité artificial disc in combination with the posterior dynamic fixation device dynamic stabilization system (DSS) and the interspinous spacer Coflex at the L4–L5 segment, respectively.

Methods

Six human L4–L5 specimens were loaded with pure moments of ±7.5 Nm in flexion/extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation in a custom-made spine tester. The testing protocol was as follows: (a) intact condition, (b) destabilization by resection of the anterior longitudinal ligament (ALL), (c) implantation of the Charité with retained posterior longitudinal ligament (PLL), (d) supplemental DSS implantation, (e) removal of DSS rods and PLL resection, (f) DSS rod re-implantation, (g) enlargement of rod length, and (h) removal of DSS and implantation of Coflex. Range of motion (ROM), neutral zone, and segmental angulation were determined.

Results

ALL resection did not influence significantly ROM. TDR increased lateral bending and axial rotation only after resection of the PLL, whereas flexion/extension remained unchanged. DSS limited all degrees of freedom prior to and after PLL resection. Rod length enlargement had no significant effect. Coflex limited significantly flexion/extension compared to the intact state and TDR, whereas lateral bending and axial rotation remained unchanged. TDR increased lordosis, whereas Coflex had a substantial kyphosing effect.

Conclusions

This study demonstrates that posterior dynamic stabilization in combination with TDR reduces flexion/extension ROM and segmental lordosis in a monosegmental biomechanical model.

Cakir B, Richter M, Kafer W, Puhl W, Schmidt R (2005) The impact of total lumbar disc replacement on segmental and total lumbar lordosis. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 20(4):357–364CrossRef

Rohlmann A, Zander T, Bergmann G (2005) Effect of total disc replacement with ProDisc on intersegmental rotation of the lumbar spine. Spine 30(7):738–743PubMedCrossRef

Kafer W, Clessienne CB, Daxle M, Kocak T, Reichel H, Cakir B (2008) Posterior component impingement after lumbar total disc replacement: a radiographic analysis of 66 ProDisc-L prostheses in 56 patients. Spine 33(22):2444–2449PubMedCrossRef

Hallab N, Link HD, McAfee PC (2003) Biomaterial optimization in total disc arthroplasty. Spine 28(20):139–152CrossRef

Kurtz SM, Peloza J, Siskey R, Villarraga ML (2005) Analysis of a retrieved polyethylene total disc replacement component. Spine J 5(3):344–350PubMedCrossRef

Kurtz SM, van Ooij A, Ross R, de Waal Malefijt J, Peloza J, Ciccarelli L, Villarraga ML (2007) Polyethylene wear and rim fracture in total disc arthroplasty. Spine J 7(1):12–21PubMedCrossRef

van Ooij A, Kurtz SM, Stessels F, Noten H, van Rhijn L (2007) Polyethylene wear debris and long-term clinical failure of the Charite disc prosthesis: a study of 4 patients. Spine 32(2):223–229PubMedCrossRef

van Ooij A, Oner FC, Verbout AJ (2003) Complications of artificial disc replacement: a report of 27 patients with the SB Charite disc. J Spinal Disord Tech 16(4):369–383PubMedCrossRef

Punt IM, Visser VM, van Rhijn LW, Kurtz SM, Antonis J, Schurink GW, van Ooij A (2008) Complications and reoperations of the SB Charite lumbar disc prosthesis: experience in 75 patients. Eur Spine J 17(1):36–43PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral

10.

Siepe CJ, Mayer HM, Heinz-Leisenheimer M, Korge A (2007) Total lumbar disc replacement: different results for different levels. Spine 32(7):782–790PubMedCrossRef

11.

Siepe CJ, Korge A, Grochulla F, Mehren C, Mayer HM (2008) Analysis of post-operative pain patterns following total lumbar disc replacement: results from fluoroscopically guided spine infiltrations. Eur Spine J 17(1):44–56PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral

12.

Shim CS, Lee SH, Shin HD, Kang HS, Choi WC, Jung B, Choi G, Ahn Y, Lee S, Lee HY (2007) CHARITE versus ProDisc: a comparative study of a minimum 3-year follow-up. Spine 32(9):1012–1018PubMedCrossRef

13.

Goel VK, Grauer JN, Patel T, Biyani A, Sairyo K, Vishnubhotla S, Matyas A, Cowgill I, Shaw M, Long R, Dick D, Panjabi MM, Serhan H (2005) Effects of charite artificial disc on the implanted and adjacent spinal segments mechanics using a hybrid testing protocol. Spine 30(24):2755–2764PubMedCrossRef

14.

Wiseman CM, Lindsey DP, Fredrick AD, Yerby SA (2005) The effect of an interspinous process implant on facet loading during extension. Spine 30(8):903–907PubMedCrossRef

15.

Wilke HJ, Drumm J, Haussler K, Mack C, Steudel WI, Kettler A (2008) Biomechanical effect of different lumbar interspinous implants on flexibility and intradiscal pressure. Eur Spine J 17(8):1049–1056PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral

16.

Kettler A, Drumm J, Heuer F, Haeussler K, Mack C, Claes L, Wilke HJ (2008) Can a modified interspinous spacer prevent instability in axial rotation and lateral bending? A biomechanical in vitro study resulting in a new idea. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 23(2):242–247CrossRef

17.

Nockels RP (2005) Dynamic stabilization in the surgical management of painful lumbar spinal disorders. Spine 30(16 Suppl):S68–S72PubMedCrossRef

18.

Schmoelz W, Erhart S, Unger S, Disch AC (2012) Biomechanical evaluation of a posterior non-fusion instrumentation of the lumbar spine. Eur Spine J 21(5):939–945PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral

19.

Niosi CA, Zhu QA, Wilson DC, Keynan O, Wilson DR, Oxland TR (2006) Biomechanical characterization of the three-dimensional kinematic behaviour of the Dynesys dynamic stabilization system: an in vitro study. Eur Spine J 15(6):913–922PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral

20.

Schmoelz W, Huber JF, Nydegger T, Dipl I, Claes L, Wilke HJ (2003) Dynamic stabilization of the lumbar spine and its effects on adjacent segments: an in vitro experiment. J Spinal Disord Tech 16(4):418–423PubMedCrossRef

21.

Schmoelz W, Huber JF, Nydegger T, Claes L, Wilke HJ (2006) Influence of a dynamic stabilisation system on load bearing of a bridged disc: an in vitro study of intradiscal pressure. Eur Spine J 15(8):1276–1285PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral

22.

Beastall J, Karadimas E, Siddiqui M, Nicol M, Hughes J, Smith F, Wardlaw D (2007) The Dynesys lumbar spinal stabilization system: a preliminary report on positional magnetic resonance imaging findings. Spine 32(6):685–690PubMedCrossRef

23.

Link HD (2002) History, design and biomechanics of the LINK SB Charite artificial disc. Eur Spine J 11(Suppl 2):S98–S105PubMedPubMedCentral

24.

Wilke HJ, Heuer F, Schmidt H (2009) Prospective design delineation and subsequent in vitro evaluation of a new posterior dynamic stabilization system. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 34(3):255–261CrossRef

25.

Wilke HJ, Rohlmann F, Neidlinger-Wilke C, Werner K, Claes L, Kettler A (2006) Validity and interobserver agreement of a new radiographic grading system for intervertebral disc degeneration: part I. Lumbar spine. Eur Spine J 15(6):720–730PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral

26.

Wilke HJ, Claes L, Schmitt H, Wolf S (1994) A universal spine tester for in vitro experiments with muscle force simulation. Eur Spine J 3(2):91–97PubMedCrossRef

27.

Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1(8476):307–310PubMedCrossRef

28.

Wilke HJ, Wenger K, Claes L (1998) Testing criteria for spinal implants: recommendations for the standardization of in vitro stability testing of spinal implants. Eur Spine J 7(2):148–154PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral

29.

Wilke HJ, Rohlmann A, Neller S, Schultheiss M, Bergmann G, Graichen F, Claes LE (2001) Is it possible to simulate physiologic loading conditions by applying pure moments? A comparison of in vivo and in vitro load components in an internal fixator. Spine 26(6):636–642PubMedCrossRef

30.

Cakir B, Richter M, Puhl W, Schmidt R (2006) Reliability of motion measurements after total disc replacement: the spike and the fin method. Eur Spine J 15(2):165–173PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral

31.

Mayer HM (2005) Total lumbar disc replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 87(8):1029–1037PubMedCrossRef

32.

Cunningham BW, Gordon JD, Dmitriev AE, Hu N, McAfee PC (2003) Biomechanical evaluation of total disc replacement arthroplasty: an in vitro human cadaveric model. Spine 28(20):S110–S117PubMedCrossRef

33.

Panjabi M, Henderson G, Abjornson C, Yue J (2007) Multidirectional testing of one- and two-level ProDisc-L versus simulated fusions. Spine 32(12):1311–1319PubMedCrossRef

34.

Panjabi M, Malcolmson G, Teng E, Tominaga Y, Henderson G, Serhan H (2007) Hybrid testing of lumbar CHARITE discs versus fusions. Spine 32(9):959–966 (discussion 967)PubMedCrossRef

35.

Wilke HJ, Schmidt H, Werner K, Schmolz W, Drumm J (2006) Biomechanical evaluation of a new total posterior-element replacement system. Spine 31(24):2790–2796 (discussion 2797)PubMedCrossRef

36.

Leivseth G, Braaten S, Frobin W, Brinckmann P (2006) Mobility of lumbar segments instrumented with a ProDisc II prosthesis: a two-year follow-up study. Spine 31(15):1726–1733PubMedCrossRef

37.

Jackson RP, McManus AC (1994) Radiographic analysis of sagittal plane alignment and balance in standing volunteers and patients with low back pain matched for age, sex, and size. A prospective controlled clinical study. Spine 19(14):1611–1618PubMedCrossRef

38.

Vialle R, Levassor N, Rillardon L, Templier A, Skalli W, Guigui P (2005) Radiographic analysis of the sagittal alignment and balance of the spine in asymptomatic subjects. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87(2):260–267PubMedCrossRef

39.

Dooris AP, Goel VK, Grosland NM, Gilbertson LG, Wilder DG (2001) Load-sharing between anterior and posterior elements in a lumbar motion segment implanted with an artificial disc. Spine 26(6):122–129CrossRef

40.

Zander T, Rohlmann A, Bergmann G (2004) Analysis of simulated single ligament transection on the mechanical behaviour of a lumbar functional spinal unit. Biomed Tech (Berl) 49(1–2):27–32CrossRef

41.

Hopf C, Heeckt H, Beske C (2004) Indikation, Biomechanik und Frühergebnisse des künstlichen Bandscheibenersatzes. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 142(2):153–158PubMedCrossRef

42.

McAfee PC, Cunningham BW, Hayes V, Sidiqi F, Dabbah M, Sefter JC, Hu N, Beatson H (2006) Biomechanical analysis of rotational motions after disc arthroplasty: implications for patients with adult deformities. Spine 31(19 Suppl):152–160CrossRef

43.

Cakir B, Richter M, Schmoelz W, Schmidt R, Reichel H, Wilke HJ (2012) Resect or not to resect: the role of posterior longitudinal ligament in lumbar total disc replacement. Eur Spine J 21(Suppl 5):S592–S598PubMedCrossRef

44.

Geisler FH (2006) The CHARITE artificial disc: design history, FDA IDE study results, and surgical technique. Clin Neurosurg 53:223–228PubMed

45.

Gedet P, Haschtmann D, Thistlethwaite PA, Ferguson SJ (2009) Comparative biomechanical investigation of a modular dynamic lumbar stabilization system and the Dynesys system. Eur Spine J 18(10):1504–1511PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral

46.

Schulte TL, Hurschler C, Haversath M, Liljenqvist U, Bullmann V, Filler TJ, Osada N, Fallenberg EM, Hackenberg L (2008) The effect of dynamic, semi-rigid implants on the range of motion of lumbar motion segments after decompression. Eur Spine J 17(8):1057–1065PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral

47.

Legaye J (2005) Consequences defavorables sur l’equilibre sagittal du rachis du systeme de neutralisation dynamique. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot 91(6):542–550PubMedCrossRef

48.

Siddiqui M, Karadimas E, Nicol M, Smith FW, Wardlaw D (2006) Effects of X-STOP device on sagittal lumbar spine kinematics in spinal stenosis. J Spinal Disord Tech 19(5):328–333PubMedCrossRef

49.

Siddiqui M, Nicol M, Karadimas E, Smith F, Wardlaw D (2005) The positional magnetic resonance imaging changes in the lumbar spine following insertion of a novel interspinous process distraction device. Spine 30(23):2677–2682PubMedCrossRef

50.

Cakir B, Schmidt R, Huch K, Puhl W, Richter M (2004) Sagittales Alignement und segmentale Beweglichkeit nach endoprothetischer Versorgung lumbaler Bewegungssegmente. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 142(2):159–165PubMedCrossRef

51.

Wilke HJ, Schmidt R, Richter M, Schmoelz W, Reichel H, Cakir B (2012) The role of prosthesis design on segmental biomechanics: semi-constrained versus unconstrained prostheses and anterior versus posterior centre of rotation. Eur Spine J 21(Suppl 5):577–584CrossRefPubMedCentral

Title: Circumferential dynamic stabilization of the lumbar spine: a biomechanical analysis
Authors: Wolfram Käfer
Balkan Cakir
Stefan Midderhoff
Heiko Reichel
Hans-Joachim Wilke
Publication date: 01-11-2014
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: European Spine Journal / Issue 11/2014
Print ISSN: 0940-6719
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0932
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-014-3286-y

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Circumferential dynamic stabilization of the lumbar spine: a biomechanical analysis

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 11/2014

Dynamic motion characteristics of the lower lumbar spine: implication to lumbar pathology and surgical treatment

9th German Spine Conference Annual Meeting of the German Spine Society 11th to 13th December 2014, Leipzig, Germany

Potential role of F18 FDG PET-CT as an imaging biomarker for the noninvasive evaluation in uncomplicated skeletal tuberculosis: a prospective clinical observational study

Viability, growth kinetics and stem cell markers of single and clustered cells in human intervertebral discs: implications for regenerative therapies

Prognostic significance of immunohistochemical expression of VEGFR2 and iNOS in spinal chordoma

The effect of noggin interference in a rabbit posterolateral spinal fusion model