Top

Published in:

01-08-2011 | Original Article

In vivo preclinical evaluation of the influence of osteoporosis on the anchorage of different pedicle screw designs

Authors: Gianluca Giavaresi, Milena Fini, Roberto Giardino, Francesca Salamanna, Maria Sartori, Veronica Borsari, Silvia Spriano, Chiara M. Bellini, Marco Brayda-Bruno

Published in: European Spine Journal | Issue 8/2011

Abstract

We investigate the anchorage of pedicle screws with different surface treatments in osteoporotic bone. Eight ewes were divided into two groups of four animals each: four sheep underwent bilateral ovariectomy (OVX Group), whereas the operation was simulated in the remaining group (SHAM Group). Eighteen months after the first operation, the Dynesys^® System was fitted to the sheep using pedicle screws with three different surface treatments: untreated, rough blasted (uncoated) and bioactive coated (bioactive). Uncoated screws showed a significantly higher bone ingrowth value compared with the untreated screws in the OVX group (9.3%, p < 0.005) and a significantly lower bone ingrowth value in the SHAM group (−11.0%, p < 0.05). Furthermore, the bioactive pedicle screws had a significant lower bone ingrowth value than the untreated screws in the SHAM group (−12.1%, p < 0.05). These results suggest that both tested surface treatments of pedicular screws may provide an advantage in terms of bone quality and osseointegration, when implanted in osteoporotic vertebrae.

Boden SD (1998) Bone repair and enhancement of clinical trial design: spine applications. Clin Orthop 355:336–346. doi:10.1097/00003086-199810001-00033

Stoll TM et al (2002) The dynamic neutralization system for the spine: a multi-center study of a novel non-fusion system. Eur Spine J 11:S170–S178. doi:10.1007/s00586-002-0438-2 PubMed

Mulholland RC (2008) The myth of lumbar instability: the importance of abnormal loading as a cause of low back pain. Eur Spine J 17(5):619–625. doi:10.1007/s00586-008-0612-2 PubMedCrossRef

Beastall J et al (2007) The Dynesys lumbar spinal stabilization system: a preliminary report on positional magnetic resonance imaging findings. Spine 32:685–690. doi:10.1097/01.brs.0000257578.44134.fb PubMedCrossRef

Schlegel JD et al (1996) Lumbar motion segment pathology adjacent to thoracolumbar, lumbar, and lumbosacral fusions. Spine 21:970–981. doi:10.1097/00007632-199604150-00013 PubMedCrossRef

Galbusera F et al (2008) Design concepts in lumbar total disc arthroplasty. Eur Spine J 17:1635–1650. doi:10.1007/s00586-008-0811-x PubMedCrossRef

Mulholland RC, Sengupta DK (2002) Rationale, principles and experimental evaluation of the concept of soft stabilization. Eur Spine J 11:S198–S205. doi:10.1007/s00586-002-0422-x PubMed

Frankel BM et al (2007) Segmental polymethylmethacrylate augmented pedicle screw fixation in patients with bone softening caused by osteoporosis and metastatic tumor involvement: a clinical evaluation. Neurosurgery 61:531–537. doi:10.1227/01.NEU.0000290899.15567.68 discussion 537–538PubMedCrossRef

Halvorson TL et al (1994) Effects of bone mineral density on pedicle screw fixation. Spine 19:2415–2420. doi:10.1097/00007632-199411000-00008 PubMedCrossRef

10.

Upasani VV et al (2009) Pedicle screw surface coatings improve fixation in nonfusion spinal constructs. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 34(4):335–343. doi:10.1097/BRS.0b013e318194878d CrossRef

11.

Carmouche JJ et al (2005) Effects of pilot hole preparation technique on pedicle screw fixation in different regions of the osteoporotic thoracic and lumbar spine. J Neurosurg Spine 3:364–370. doi:10.3171/spi.2005.3.5.0364 PubMedCrossRef

12.

Cook SD et al (2001) Lumbosacral fixation using expandable pedicle screws. an alternative in reoperation and osteoporosis. Spine J 1:109–114. doi:10.1016/S1529-9430(01)00020-1 PubMedCrossRef

13.

Nicoli Aldini N et al (2002) Pedicular fixation in the osteoporotic spine: a pilot in vivo study on long-term ovariectomized sheep. J Orthop Res 20:1217–1224. doi:10.1016/S0736-0266(02)00069-4 PubMedCrossRef

14.

Fransen P (2007) Increasing pedicle screw anchoring in the osteoporotic spine by cement injection through the implant. Technical note and report of three cases. J Neurosurg Spine 7:366–369. doi:10.3171/SPI-07/09/366 PubMedCrossRef

15.

Fini M et al (2003) Biological assessment of the bone–screw interface after insertion of uncoated and hydroxyapatite-coated pedicular screws in osteopenic sheep. J Biomed Mater Res 66:176–183. doi:10.1002/jbm.a.10605 CrossRef

16.

Fini M et al (2003) Biomechanical and histomorphometric investigations on two morphologically differing titanium surfaces with and without fluorohydroxyapatite coating: an experimental study in sheep tibiae. Biomaterials 24:3182–3192. doi:10.1016/S0142-9612(03)00164-9

17.

Giavaresi G et al (2003) Mechanical and histomorphometric evaluations of titanium implants with different surface treatments inserted in sheep cortical bone. Biomaterials 24:1583–1594. doi:10.1016/S0142-9612(02)00548-3 PubMedCrossRef

18.

Giavaresi G et al (2004) Different diagnostic techniques for the assessment of cortical bone on osteoporotic animals. Biomed Pharmacother 58:494–499. doi:10.1016/j.biopha.2004.08.017 PubMedCrossRef

19.

Nicoli Aldini N et al (2004) Osseointegration of bioactive glass-coated and uncoated zirconia in osteopenic bone: an in vivo experimental study. J Biomed Mater Res 68A(2):264–272. doi:10.1002/jbm.a.20057 CrossRef

20.

Schwarzenbach O et al (2005) Posterior dynamic stabilization systems: DYNESYS. Orthop Clin N Am 36:363–372. doi:10.1016/j.ocl.2005.03.001 CrossRef

21.

Kim HM et al (2000) Formation of bioactive functionally graded structure on Ti-6Al-4 V alloy by chemical surface treatment. J Mater Sci Mater Med 11:555–559. doi:10.1023/A:1008924102096 PubMedCrossRef

22.

Spriano S et al (2005) Characterisation of surface modified Ti-6Al-7Nb alloy. J Mater Sci Mater Med 16:301–312. doi:10.1007/s10856-005-0628-7 PubMedCrossRef

23.

Parfitt AM et al (1987) Bone histomorphometry: standardization of nomenclature, symbols, and units. Report of the ASBMR histomorphometry nomenclature committee. J Bone Miner Res 2:595–610. doi:10.1002/jbmr.5650020617 PubMedCrossRef

24.

Spriano S et al (2005) Surface properties and cell response of low metal ion release Ti-6Al-7Nb alloy after multi-step chemical and thermal treatments. Biomaterials 26:1219–1229. doi:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2004.04 PubMedCrossRef

25.

Chappard D et al (1999) The early remodeling phases around titanium implants: a histomorphometric assessment of bone quality in a 3- and 6-month study in sheep. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 14:189–196PubMed

26.

Spriano S et al (2005) New chemical treatment for bioactive titanium alloy with high corrosion resistance. J Mater Sci Mater Med 16:203–211. doi:10.1007/s10856-005-6681-4 PubMedCrossRef

27.

Iannuzzi A et al (2010) In vivo deformation, surface damage, and biostability of retrieved Dynesys systems. Spine 35:E1310–E1316. doi:10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181d6f84f CrossRef

28.

Ko CC et al (2010) Screw loosening in the Dynesys stabilization system: radiographic evidence and effect on outcomes. Neurosurg Focus 28:E10. doi:10.3171/2010.3.FOCUS1052 PubMedCrossRef

29.

Liu CL et al (2010) Influence of Dynesys system screw profile on adjacent segment and screw. J Spinal Disord Tech 23:410–417. doi:10.1097/BSD.0b013e3181b63d89 PubMedCrossRef

30.

Meyer CM et al (2008) Discrepancies in T-score readings between patients with asymmetrical gait. J Am Geriatr Soc 56:758. doi:10.1111/j.1532-5415.2008.01642.x PubMedCrossRef

31.

Fini M et al (2000) The ovariectomized sheep as a model for testing biomaterials and prosthetic devices in osteopenic bone: a preliminary study on iliac crest biopsies. Int J Artif Organs 23:275–281PubMed

32.

Giavaresi G et al (2001) The ovariectomized ewe model in the evaluation of biomaterials for prosthetic devices in spinal fixation. Int J Artif Organs 24:814–820PubMed

33.

Turner et al (1993) Static and dynamic histomorphometric data in 9-to 11-years old ewes. Poster Session Abstracts-ACVS: 413

34.

Rocca M et al (2002) Osteointegration of hydroxypapatite-coated and uncoated titanium screws in long-term ovariectomized sheep. Biomaterials 23:1017–1023. doi:10.1016/S0142-9612(01)00213-7 PubMedCrossRef

35.

Wilke HJ et al (1997) Are sheep spines a valid biomechanical model for human spines? Spine 2:2365–2374CrossRef

Title: In vivo preclinical evaluation of the influence of osteoporosis on the anchorage of different pedicle screw designs
Authors: Gianluca Giavaresi
Milena Fini
Roberto Giardino
Francesca Salamanna
Maria Sartori
Veronica Borsari
Silvia Spriano
Chiara M. Bellini
Marco Brayda-Bruno
Publication date: 01-08-2011
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: European Spine Journal / Issue 8/2011
Print ISSN: 0940-6719
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0932
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-011-1831-5

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

In vivo preclinical evaluation of the influence of osteoporosis on the anchorage of different pedicle screw designs

Abstract

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 8/2011

Cyclic stretch-induced apoptosis in rat annulus fibrosus cells is mediated in part by endoplasmic reticulum stress through nitric oxide production

A kinematic analysis of relative stability of the lower extremities between subjects with and without chronic low back pain

Differentiation of localization of spinal hemangioblastomas based on imaging and pathological findings

A new approach to assess movements and isometric postures of spine and trunk at the workplace

Expert’s comment concerning Grand Rounds case entitled “Anterior, thoracoscopic-assisted reduction and stabilization of a thoracic burst fracture (T8) in a pregnant woman” (by Klaus John Schnake, Matti Scholz, Andreas Marx, Reinhard Hoffmann, Frank Kandziora)

The prevalence of MRI-defined spinal pathoanatomies and their association with Modic changes in individuals seeking care for low back pain