In-vitro Flexibility Characteristics of Dynamic Pedicle Screw Systems

作者: C. Schilling , S. Krüger , J. Beger , T. M. Grupp , W. Blömer

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-03882-2_117

关键词: RotationFlexibility (anatomy)Neutral zoneBiomedical engineeringStiffnessCadaverMaterials scienceImplantLumbarFixation (surgical)

摘要: In recent years, nonfusion stabilization of the lumbar spine has gained more and popularity. This systems intend to maintain or restore intersegmental motions magnitudes intact have no negative effects on segments adjacent stabilized once. study investigates posterior dynamic devices with different implant stiffness in comparison gold standard dorsal spinal instrumentation, namely fusion. To determine magnitude effect segment, six human cadaver spines were fixed a simulator loaded pure moments alone, additional preload three motion planes. For each spine, five stages tested: native, rigid fixation, fixation two Prototypes Dynesys®. Intersegmental measured at all levels. bridged flexible than fixation. The results showed that there is strong dependency rotation flexion/ extension lateral bending. was not influenced by either method. Our suggests provides substantial stability case degenerative disorders can therefore be considered as an alternative method fusion surgery this indications while segment preserved. But it still unclear which amount should resrticted allowed.

参考文章(11)
M M Panjabi, T R Oxland, I Yamamoto, J J Crisco, Mechanical behavior of the human lumbar and lumbosacral spine as shown by three-dimensional load-displacement curves Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American Volume. ,vol. 76, pp. 413- 424 ,(1994) , 10.2106/00004623-199403000-00012
Antonius Rohlmann, Jorge Calisse, Georg Bergmann, Ulrich Weber, Internal spinal fixator stiffness has only a minor influence on stresses in the adjacent discs. Spine. ,vol. 24, pp. 1192- 1196 ,(1999) , 10.1097/00007632-199906150-00004
Peter A. Cripton, Sabina B. Bruehlmann, Tracy E. Orr, Thomas R. Oxland, Lutz-P. Nolte, In vitro axial preload application during spine flexibility testing: towards reduced apparatus-related artefacts. Journal of Biomechanics. ,vol. 33, pp. 1559- 1568 ,(2000) , 10.1016/S0021-9290(00)00145-7
John D. Schlegel, Jason A. Smith, Rand L. Schleusener, Lumbar motion segment pathology adjacent to thoracolumbar, lumbar, and lumbosacral fusions. Spine. ,vol. 21, pp. 970- 981 ,(1996) , 10.1097/00007632-199604150-00013
Christoph Schilling, Uwe Vieweg, Thomas M. Grupp, Wilhelm Blömer, A SYNTHETIC IN-VITRO MODEL FOR A STANDARDIZED COMPARISON OF DYNAMIC STABILIZATION DEVICES Journal of Biomechanics. ,vol. 41, ,(2008) , 10.1016/S0021-9290(08)70524-4
Neil R. Crawford, Anna G. U. Brantley, Curtis A. Dickman, Edward J. Koeneman, An apparatus for applying pure nonconstraining moments to spine segments in vitro. Spine. ,vol. 20, pp. 2097- 2100 ,(1995) , 10.1097/00007632-199510000-00005
Antonius Rohlmann, Nagananda K. Burra, Thomas Zander, Georg Bergmann, Comparison of the effects of bilateral posterior dynamic and rigid fixation devices on the loads in the lumbar spine: a finite element analysis European Spine Journal. ,vol. 16, pp. 1223- 1231 ,(2007) , 10.1007/S00586-006-0292-8
Malhar Kumar, Andrei Baklanov, Daniel Chopin, Correlation between sagittal plane changes and adjacent segment degeneration following lumbar spine fusion. European Spine Journal. ,vol. 10, pp. 314- 319 ,(2001) , 10.1007/S005860000239
W. Schmoelz, J. F. Huber, T. Nydegger, Dipl-Ing, L. Claes, H. J. Wilke, Dynamic stabilization of the lumbar spine and its effects on adjacent segments: an in vitro experiment. Journal of Spinal Disorders & Techniques. ,vol. 16, pp. 418- 423 ,(2003) , 10.1097/00024720-200308000-00015