Top

European Spine Journal

Published in:

01-01-2017 | Original Article

Preclinical evaluation of posterior spine stabilization devices: can we compare in vitro and in vivo loads on the instrumentation?

Authors: Luigi La Barbera, Fabio Galbusera, Hans-Joachim Wilke, Tomaso Villa

Published in: European Spine Journal | Issue 1/2017

Abstract

Purpose

To discuss whether the standard test method for preclinical evaluation of posterior spine stabilization devices with an anterior support correctly describes the effect of two short-segment posterior stabilization techniques frequently used in clinical practice for the treatment of traumatic, degenerative and iatrogenic instabilities.

Methods

A finite element study compared a validated instrumented L2–L4 segment undergoing standing, upper body flexion and extension to ISO 12189 standards model under a compressive load. A bridge instrumentation, with screws only at cranial and caudal levels, and a full stabilization, using screws at every level, are considered for both conditions. The internal loads on the spinal rod and the stress values on the implant are analysed in detail.

Results

Using ISO model and a bridge stabilization construct allow to overstress the pedicle screw more than a full stabilization with respect to the corresponding L2–L4 segment undergoing upper body flexion, while the stress on the spinal rod is comparable. Choosing softer/stiffer springs would involve higher/lower loads on every component.

Conclusions

ISO model predicts the effects of using both a full and a bridge posterior instrumentation. The study justifies the use of both conditions during in vitro reliability tests to achieve meaningful results easy to compare to clinically relevant loading modes and known in vivo failure modes.

ASTM Standard (2014) F1717: Standard test methods for spinal implant constructs in a vertebrectomy model. doi:10.1520/F1717-15

ISO Standard (2008) 12189: Implants for surgery—mechanical testing of implantable spinal devices—fatigue test method for spinal implant assemblies using an anterior support

La Barbera L, Galbusera F, Wilke H-J, Villa T (2016) Preclinical evaluation of posterior spine stabilization devices: can the current standards represent basic everyday life activities? Eur Spine J. doi:10.1007/s00586-016-4622-1

Carson W, Asher M, Boachie-Adjei O, Akbarnia B, Dzioba R, Lebwohl N (2003) History of isola-vsp fatigue testing results with correlation to clinical implant failures. In: Melkerson M, Griffith S, Kirkpatrick J (eds) Spinal implants: are we evaluating them appropriately? STP 1431:3–16. ASTM International

Cunningham BW, Sefter JC, Shono Y, McAfee PC (1993) Static and cyclical biomechanical analysis of pedicle screw spinal constructs. Spine 18(12):1677–1688CrossRefPubMed

La Barbera L, Costa F, Villa T (2016) ISO 12189 standard for the preclinical evaluation of posterior spinal stabilization devices—II: a parametric comparative study. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 230(2):134–144. doi:10.1177/0954411915621588 CrossRefPubMed

La Barbera L, Villa T (2016) ISO 12189 standard for the preclinical evaluation of posterior spinal stabilization devices—I: assembly procedure and validation. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 230(2):122–133. doi:10.1177/0954411915621587 CrossRefPubMed

La Barbera L, Ottardi C, Villa T (2015) Comparative analysis of international standards for the fatigue testing of posterior spinal fixation systems: the importance of preload in ISO 12189. Spine J 15(10):2290–2296. doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2015.07.461 CrossRefPubMed

La Barbera L, Galbusera F, Villa T, Wilke H-J (2014) ASTM F1717 standard for the preclinical evaluation of posterior spinal fixators: can we improve it? Proc Inst Mech Eng H 228(10):1014–1026. doi:10.1177/0954411914554244 CrossRefPubMed

10.

Villa T, La Barbera L, Galbusera F (2014) Comparative analysis of international standards for the fatigue testing of posterior spinal fixation systems. Spine J 14(4):695–704. doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2013.08.032 CrossRefPubMed

11.

Chamoli U, Diwan AD (2014) Tsafnat N Pedicle screw-based posterior dynamic stabilizers for degenerative spine: in vitro biomechanical testing and clinical outcomes. J Biomed Mater Res A (US) 102(9):p3324–p3340CrossRef

12.

Smith JS, Shaffrey CI, Ames CP, Demakakos J, Fu KM, Keshavarzi S, Li CM, Deviren V, Schwab FJ, Lafage V, Bess S (2012) Assessment of symptomatic rod fracture after posterior instrumented fusion for adult spinal deformity. Neurosurgery 71(4):862–867CrossRefPubMed

13.

Hyun SJ, Rhim SC (2010) Clinical outcomes and complications after pedicle subtraction osteotomy for fixed sagittal imbalance patients: a long-term follow-up data. J Korean Neurosurg Soc 47(2):95–101. doi:10.3340/jkns.2010.47.2.95 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

14.

Sapkas G, Kateros K, Papadakis SA, Brilakis E, Macheras G, Katonis P (2010) Treatment of unstable thoracolumbar burst fractures by indirect reduction and posterior stabilization: short-segment versus long-segment stabilization. Open Orthop J 15(4):7–13. doi:10.2174/1874325001004010007 CrossRef

15.

Hwang JH, Modi HN, Yang JH, Kim SJ, Lee SH (2009) Short segment pedicle screw fixation for unstable T11-L2 fractures: with or without fusion? A three-year follow-up study. Acta Orthop Belg 75(6):822–827PubMed

16.

Korovessis P, Papazisis Z, Koureas G, Lambiris E (2004) Rigid, semirigid versus dynamic instrumentation for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: a correlative radiological and clinical analysis of short-term results. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 29(7):735–742CrossRef

17.

Farrokhi MR, Razmkon A, Maghami Z, Nikoo Z (2010) Inclusion of the fracture level in short segment fixation of thoracolumbar fractures. Eur Spine J 2010(19):1651–1656CrossRef

18.

Chen CS, Chen WJ, Cheng CK, Jao SH, Chueh SC, Wang CC (2005) Failure analysis of broken pedicle screws on spinal instrumentation. Med EngPhys 27(6):487–496CrossRef

19.

Jutte PC, Castelein RM (2002) Complications of pedicle screws in lumbar and lumbosacral fusions in 105 consecutive primary operations. Eur Spine J 2002(11):594–598CrossRef

20.

Pihlajämaki H, Myllynen P, Böstman O (1997) Complications of transpedicular lumbosacral fixation for non-traumatic disorders. J Bone Joint Surg Br 79(2):183–189CrossRefPubMed

21.

Sanderson PL, Fraser RD, Hall DJ et al (1999) Short segment fixation of thoracolumbar burst fractures without fusion. Eur Spine J 8(6):495–500CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

22.

McCormack T, Karaikovic E, Gaines RW (1994) The load sharing classification of spine fractures. Spine 19(15):1741–1744CrossRefPubMed

23.

Magerl F, Aebi M, Gertzbein SD, Harms J, Nazarian S (1994) A comprehensive classification of thoracic and lumbar injuries. Eur Spine J 3(4):184–201CrossRefPubMed

24.

Carl AL, Tromanhauser SG, Roger DJ (1992) Pedicle screw instrumentation for thoracolumbar burst fractures and fracture-dislocations. A calf spine model. Spine 17:317–324CrossRef

25.

Altay M, Ozkurt B, Aktekin CN, Ozturk AM, Dogan O, Tabak AY (2007) Treatment of unstable thoracolumbar junction burst fractures with short- or long-segment posterior fixation in magerl type a fractures. Eur Spine J 16(8):1145–1155. doi:10.1007/s00586-007-0310-5 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

26.

Mohi EMM, Ali AM (2014) Lumbar transpedicular implant failure: a clinical and surgical challenge and its radiological assessment. Asian Spine J 8(3):281–297. doi:10.4184/asj.2014.8.3.281 CrossRef

27.

Tian JW, Wang L, Xia T, Liu CY, Zhao QH, Dong SH (2011) Posterior short-segmental fixation combined with intermediate screws vs. conventional intersegmental fixation for monosegmental thoracolumbar fractures. Orthopedics 34(8):e389–e396. doi:10.3928/01477447-20110627-08 PubMed

28.

Galbusera F, Bellini C, Anasetti F, Ciavarro C, Lovi A, Brayda-Bruno M (2011) Rigid and flexible spinal stabilization devices: a biomechanical comparison. Med Eng Phys 33(4):490–496. doi:10.1016/j.medengphy.2010.11.018 CrossRefPubMed

29.

Rohlmann A, Bergmann G, Graichen F, Weber U (1997) Comparison of loads on internal spinal fixation devices measured in vitro and in vivo. Med Eng Phys 19(6):539–546CrossRefPubMed

30.

Wilke HJ, Rohlmann A, Neller S, Schultheiss M, Bergmann G, Graichen F, Claes L (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):636–642CrossRefPubMed

31.

Rohlmann A, Zander T, Bergmann G, Boustani H (2012) Optimal stiffness of a pedicle-screw-based motion preservation implant for the lumbar spine. Europ Spine J 21:666–673. doi:10.1007/s00586-011-2047-4 CrossRef

32.

Rohlmann A, Zander T, Rao M, Bergmann G (2009) Applying a follower load delivers realistic results for simulating standing. J Biomec 42(10):1520–1526. doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2009.03.048 CrossRef

33.

Rohlmann A, Zander T, Rao M, Bergmann G (2009) Realistic loading conditions for upper body bending. J Biomech 42:884–890. doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2009.01.017 CrossRefPubMed

34.

Rohlmann A, Bergmann G, Graichen F (1999) Loads on internal spinal fixators measured in different body positions. Europ Spine J 8(5):354–359CrossRef

35.

ISO Standard (2010) 10243: Tools for pressing—compression springs with rectangular section—housing dimensions and colour coding

36.

Wu ZX, Zhan C, Cui G, Liu D, Wan SY, Zhang Y, Zhao X, Lei W (2012) Stress distribution on the screws in posterior lumbar fusion of isthmic spondylolisthesis with 2- or 3-vertebra fixation techniques: a biomechanical cadaveric study. J Surg Res 176(1):95–101. doi:10.1016/j.jss.2011.05.004 CrossRefPubMed

37.

Rohlmann A, Consmuller T, Dreischarf M, Bashkuev M, Disch A, Pries E, Duda GN, Schmidt H (2014) Measurement of the number of lumbar spinal movements in the sagittal plane in a 24-h period. Eur Spine J (Germany) 23(11):2375–2384. doi:10.1007/s00586-014-3588-0 CrossRef

38.

Rohlmann A, Pohl D, Bender A, Graichen F, Dymke J, Schmidt H, Bergmann G (2014) Activities of everyday life with high spinal loads. PLoS One (United States) 9(5):pe98510. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0098510 CrossRef

Title: Preclinical evaluation of posterior spine stabilization devices: can we compare in vitro and in vivo loads on the instrumentation?
Authors: Luigi La Barbera
Fabio Galbusera
Hans-Joachim Wilke
Tomaso Villa
Publication date: 01-01-2017
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: European Spine Journal / Issue 1/2017
Print ISSN: 0940-6719
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0932
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-016-4766-z

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Preclinical evaluation of posterior spine stabilization devices: can we compare in vitro and in vivo loads on the instrumentation?

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 1/2017

Laminectomy and fusion vs laminoplasty for multi-level cervical myelopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Neurophysiological monitoring during acute and progressive experimentally induced compression injury of the spinal cord in pigs

The aging disc: using an ovine model to examine age-related differences in the biomechanical properties of the intralamellar matrix of single lamellae

Reducing kyphotic deformity by posterior vertebral column resection with 360° osteosynthesis in metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC)

A model of acute central cervical spinal cord injury syndrome combined with chronic injury in goats

Letter to the Editor concerning “Risk of revision surgery for adult idiopathic scoliosis: a survival analysis of 517 cases over 25 years” by G. Riouallon et al. (Eur Spine J; 2016;25(8):2527–2534)