Top

Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2019 | Research article

The appropriate hybrid surgical strategy in three-level cervical degenerative disc disease: a finite element analysis

Authors: Y. M. Xie, Y. C. Zheng, S. J. Qiu, K. Q. Gong, Y. Duan

Published in: Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research | Issue 1/2019

Abstract

Objective

The purpose of this FE study was to analyze the biomechanical characteristics of different HS strategies used in the treatment of three-level CDDD (one-level CDA and two-level ACDF).

Methods

We validated the FE model of an intact cervical spine established by transferring the data, collected by 3D CT scan, to the FE software ABAQUS and comparing these data with the data from published studies. Then, the FE model of hybrid surgery was reconstructed to analyze the range of motion (ROM), facet joint force, and stress distribution on an ultrahigh molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) core.

Results

The current cervical FE model was able to measure the biomechanical changes in a follow-up hybrid surgery simulation. The total ROM of the cervical HS models was substantially decreased compared with the total ROM of the intact group, and the M2 (C3/4 ACDF, C4/5 CDA, and C5/6 ACDF) model had the closest total ROM to the intact group, but the facet joint force adjacent to the treatment levels showed very little difference among them. The stress distribution showed noticeable similarity: two flanks were observed in the center core, but the inlay of M2 was more vulnerable.

Conclusions

Through the comparison of ROM, the facet joint force after CDA, and the stress distribution of the prosthesis, we find that M2 model has a better theoretical outcome, especially in preserving the maximum total ROM.

Gibson J, Nouri A, Krueger B, Lakomkin N, Nasser R, Gimbel D, Cheng J. Degenerative cervical myelopathy: a clinical review. Yale J Biol Med. 2018;91:43–8.PubMedPubMedCentral

Schoenfeld AJ, George AA, Bader JO, Caram PM Jr. Incidence and epidemiology of cervical radiculopathy in the United States military: 2000 to 2009. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2012;25:17–22. https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0b013e31820d77ea.CrossRefPubMed

Jackson RJ, Davis RJ, Hoffman GA, Bae HW, Hisey MS, Kim KD, Gaede SE, Nunley PD. Subsequent surgery rates after cervical total disc replacement using a Mobi-C Cervical Disc Prosthesis versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a prospective randomized clinical trial with 5-year follow-up. J Neurosurg Spine. 2016;24:734–45. https://doi.org/10.3171/2015.8.Spine15219.CrossRefPubMed

Elsawaf A, Mastronardi L, Roperto R, Bozzao A, Caroli M, Ferrante L. Effect of cervical dynamics on adjacent segment degeneration after anterior cervical fusion with cages. Neurosurg Rev. 2009;32:215–24; discussion 224. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10143-008-0164-2.CrossRefPubMed

Turel MK, Kerolus MG, Adogwa O, Traynelis VC. Cervical arthroplasty: what does the labeling say? Neurosurg Focus. 2017;42:E2. https://doi.org/10.3171/2016.11.Focus16414.CrossRefPubMed

Laratta JL, Shillingford JN, Saifi C, Riew KD. Cervical disc arthroplasty: a comprehensive review of single-level, multilevel, and hybrid procedures. Glob Spine J. 2018;8:78–83. https://doi.org/10.1177/2192568217701095.CrossRef

Barbagallo GM, Assietti R, Corbino L, Olindo G, Foti PV, Russo V, Albanese V. Early results and review of the literature of a novel hybrid surgical technique combining cervical arthrodesis and disc arthroplasty for treating multilevel degenerative disc disease: opposite or complementary techniques? Eur Spine J. 2009;18(Suppl 1):29–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-009-0978-9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Mo Z, Li Q, Jia Z, Yang J, Wong DW, Fan Y. Biomechanical consideration of prosthesis selection in hybrid surgery for bi-level cervical disc degenerative diseases. Eur Spine J. 2017;26:1181–90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-016-4777-9.CrossRefPubMed

Wheeldon JA, Pintar FA, Knowles S, Yoganandan N. Experimental flexion/extension data corridors for validation of finite element models of the young, normal cervical spine. J Biomech. 2006;39:375–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2004.11.014.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Eswaran SK, Gupta A, Adams MF, Keaveny TM. Cortical and trabecular load sharing in the human vertebral body. J Bone Miner Res. 2006;21:307–14. https://doi.org/10.1359/jbmr.2006.21.2.307.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Hernandez CJ, Gupta A, Keaveny TM. A biomechanical analysis of the effects of resorption cavities on cancellous bone strength. J Bone Miner Res. 2006;21:1248–55. https://doi.org/10.1359/jbmr.060514.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

12.

Yoganandan N, Knowles SA, Maiman DJ, Pintar FA. Anatomic study of the morphology of human cervical facet joint. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003;28:2317–23. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.Brs.0000085356.89103.A5.CrossRef

13.

Denoziere G, Ku DN. Biomechanical comparison between fusion of two vertebrae and implantation of an artificial intervertebral disc. J Biomech. 2006;39:766–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2004.07.039.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Kumaresan S, Yoganandan N, Pintar FA. Finite element analysis of the cervical spine: a material property sensitivity study. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 1999;14:41–53.CrossRef

15.

Yoganandan N, Kumaresan S, Pintar FA. Geometric and mechanical properties of human cervical spine ligaments. J Biomech Eng. 2000;122:623–9.CrossRef

16.

Goel VK, Clausen JD. Prediction of load sharing among spinal components of a C5-C6 motion segment using the finite element approach. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1998;23:684–91.CrossRef

17.

Clausen JD, Goel VK, Traynelis VC, Scifert J. Uncinate processes and Luschka joints influence the biomechanics of the cervical spine: quantification using a finite element model of the C5-C6 segment. J Orthop Res. 1997;15:342–7. https://doi.org/10.1002/jor.1100150305.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Yoganandan N, Kumaresan SC, Voo L, Pintar FA, Larson SJ. Finite element modeling of the C4-C6 cervical spine unit. Med Eng Phys. 1996;18:569–74.CrossRef

19.

Yoganandan N, Kumaresan S, Pintar FA. Biomechanics of the cervical spine part 2. Cervical spine soft tissue responses and biomechanical modeling. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2001;16:1–27.CrossRef

20.

Lee SH, Im YJ, Kim KT, Kim YH, Park WM, Kim K. Comparison of cervical spine biomechanics after fixed- and mobile-core artificial disc replacement: a finite element analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2011;36:700–8. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181f5cb87.CrossRef

21.

Hisey MS, Bae HW, Davis R, Gaede S, Hoffman G, Kim K, Nunley PD, Peterson D, Rashbaum R, Stokes J. Multi-center, prospective, randomized, controlled investigational device exemption clinical trial comparing Mobi-C Cervical Artificial Disc to anterior discectomy and fusion in the treatment of symptomatic degenerative disc disease in the cervical spine. Int J Spine Surg. 2014;8. https://doi.org/10.14444/1007.CrossRef

22.

Moroney SP, Schultz AB, Miller JA, Andersson GB. Load-displacement properties of lower cervical spine motion segments. J Biomech. 1988;21:769–79.CrossRef

23.

Panjabi MM, Crisco JJ, Vasavada A, Oda T, Cholewicki J, Nibu K, Shin E. Mechanical properties of the human cervical spine as shown by three-dimensional load-displacement curves. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2001;26:2692–700.CrossRef

24.

Finn MA, Brodke DS, Daubs M, Patel A, Bachus KN. Local and global subaxial cervical spine biomechanics after single-level fusion or cervical arthroplasty. Eur Spine J. 2009;18:1520–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-009-1085-7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

25.

Northover JR, Wild JB, Braybrooke J, Blanco J. The epidemiology of cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Skelet Radiol. 2012;41:1543–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-012-1388-3.CrossRef

26.

Chang UK, Kim DH, Lee MC, Willenberg R, Kim SH, Lim J. Changes in adjacent-level disc pressure and facet joint force after cervical arthroplasty compared with cervical discectomy and fusion. J Neurosurg Spine. 2007;7:33–9. https://doi.org/10.3171/spi-07/07/033.CrossRefPubMed

27.

Park J, Shin JJ, Lim J. Biomechanical analysis of disc pressure and facet contact force after simulated two-level cervical surgeries (fusion and arthroplasty) and hybrid surgery. World Neurosurg. 2014;82:1388–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2014.06.013.CrossRefPubMed

28.

Cho BY, Lim J, Sim HB, Park J. Biomechanical analysis of the range of motion after placement of a two-level cervical ProDisc-C versus hybrid construct. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010;35:1769–76. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181c225fa.CrossRef

29.

Brenke C, Scharf J, Schmieder K, Barth M. High prevalence of heterotopic ossification after cervical disc arthroplasty: outcome and intraoperative findings following explantation of 22 cervical disc prostheses. J Neurosurg Spine. 2012;17:141–6. https://doi.org/10.3171/2012.4.Spine12223.CrossRefPubMed

30.

Auerbach JD, Jones KJ, Fras CI, Balderston JR, Rushton SA, Chin KR. The prevalence of indications and contraindications to cervical total disc replacement. Spine J. 2008;8:711–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2007.06.018.CrossRefPubMed

31.

Rundell SA, Auerbach JD, Balderston RA, Kurtz SM. Total disc replacement positioning affects facet contact forces and vertebral body strains. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2008;33:2510–7. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e318186b258.CrossRef

32.

Sasso WR, Smucker JD, Sasso MP, Sasso RC. Long-term clinical outcomes of cervical disc arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized, controlled trial. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2017;42:209–16. https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0000000000001746.CrossRef

33.

Rousseau MA, Bradford DS, Bertagnoli R, Hu SS, Lotz JC. Disc arthroplasty design influences intervertebral kinematics and facet forces. Spine J. 2006;6:258–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2005.07.004.CrossRefPubMed

Title: The appropriate hybrid surgical strategy in three-level cervical degenerative disc disease: a finite element analysis
Authors: Y. M. Xie
Y. C. Zheng
S. J. Qiu
K. Q. Gong
Y. Duan
Publication date: 01-12-2019
Publisher: BioMed Central
Published in: Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research / Issue 1/2019
Electronic ISSN: 1749-799X
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-019-1502-5

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

The appropriate hybrid surgical strategy in three-level cervical degenerative disc disease: a finite element analysis

Abstract

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2019

Upregulation of microRNA-23b-3p induced by farnesoid X receptor regulates the proliferation and apoptosis of osteosarcoma cells

The serum level of D-Dimer is not suitable for distinguishing between prosthetic joint infection and aseptic loosening

Treatment of unstable distal-third clavicule fractures using minimal invasive closed-loop double endobutton technique

Patient-specific instrumentation improved three-dimensional accuracy in total knee arthroplasty: a comparative radiographic analysis of 1257 total knee arthroplasties

Inferior calcar buttress reduction pattern for displaced femoral neck fractures in young adults: a preliminary report and an effective alternative

Three-dimensional-printed custom-made hemipelvic endoprosthesis for primary malignancies involving acetabulum: the design solution and surgical techniques