Innovative sacropelvic fixation using iliac screws and triangular titanium implants.

PURPOSE: Sacropelvic fixation is frequently used in combination with thoracolumbar instrumentation for the correction of severe spinal deformities. The purpose of this study was to explore the effects of the triangular titanium implants on the iliac screw fixation. Our hypothesis was that the use of triangular titanium implants can increase the stability of the iliac screw fixation. METHODS: Three T10-pelvis instrumented models were created: pedicle screws and rods in T10-S1, and bilateral iliac screws (IL); posterior fixation and bilateral iliac screws and triangular implants inserted bilaterally in a sacro-alar-iliac trajectory (IL-Tri-SAI); posterior fixation and bilateral iliac screws and two bilateral triangular titanium implants inserted in a lateral trajectory (IL-Tri-Lat). Outputs of these models, such as hardware stresses, were compared against a model with pedicle screws and rods in T10-S1 (PED). RESULTS: Sacropelvic fixation decreased the L5-S1 motion by 75-90%. The motion of the SIJ was reduced by 55-80% after iliac fixation; the addition of triangular titanium implants further reduced it. IL, IL-Tri-SAI and IL-Tri-Lat demonstrated lower S1 pedicle stresses with respect to PED. Triangular implants had a protective effect on the iliac screw stresses. CONCLUSION: Sacropelvic fixation decreased L5-S1 range of motion suggesting increased stability of the joint. The combination of triangular titanium implants and iliac screws reduced the residual flexibility of the sacroiliac joint, and resulted in a protective effect on the S1 pedicle screws and iliac screws themselves. Clinical studies may be performed to demonstrate applicability of these FEA results to patient outcomes.

Does the anterior column realignment technique influences the stresses on posterior instrumentation in sagittal imbalance correction? A biomechanical, finite-element analysis of L5-S1 ALIF and L3-4 lateral ACR.

STUDY DESIGN: Biomechanical finite-element study. OBJECTIVE: To directly compare the biomechanical effects of two different techniques for sagittal plane correction of adult spine deformity based on the anterior longitudinal ligament (ALL) resection and use of hyperlordotic cages, namely, the anterior column realignment (ACR) in L3-4, and ALIF in L5-S1 in terms of primary stability and rod stresses using finite-element models. METHODS: A finite-element model of the thoracolumbar spine was used to perform the analysis. Starting from this "intact" model, three further models were constructed through the insertion of spinal instrumentation, i.e., pedicle screws, rods and cages: 1) posterior instrumentation between T9 and S1 (referred to as "T9-S1"); 2) posterior instrumentation T9-S1 + Hyperlordotic (26°) ALIF cage in L5-S1 ("ALIF"); 3) posterior instrumentation T9-S1 + Hyperlordotic (30°) ACR cage in L3-4 ("ACR"). These models were studied by simulations applying, alternately, a pure moment of 7.5 Nm between the three planes of motion (flexion, extension, lateral bending, and bilateral axial rotation), uniformly distributed over the upper surface of the T9 thoracic vertebra. A total of 24 simulations were performed (6 per models). RESULTS: All models presented a significant reduced ROM when compared to the intact model; the ROM reduction was higher both at L3-4 in the ACR model and at L5-S1 in the ALIF model. At L3-4, the ACR model had, in all cases, the lowest maximum values of Von Mises stresses on the rods, especially in flexion-extension. At L4-5, the ALIF model had the lowest stresses during flexion-extension and axial rotation, while the ACR model had the lowest stresses during lateral bending. At L5-S1, the ALIF model had, in all cases, the lowest stresses on the rods. CONCLUSIONS: This finite-element study showed how both ACR at L3-4 and ALIF-ACR at L5-S1 are effective in restoring lumbar lordosis (LL), stabilizing the spine and reducing stress on posterior rods at the index level when compared to a simple fixation model. Interestingly, ALIF-ACR reduces rod stress even at L4-5 in flexion-extension and axial rotation, possibly due to a better distribution of LL, especially on the lower arch, while ACR reduces the stress at L4-5 in lateral bending, possibly thanks to the larger footprint of the cage that increases the area of contact with the lateral side of the endplates.

The Simulation of Muscles Forces Increases the Stresses in Lumbar Fixation Implants with Respect to Pure Moment Loading.

Simplified loading conditions such as pure moments are frequently used to compare different instrumentation techniques to treat spine disorders. The purpose of this study was to determine if the use of realistic loading conditions such as muscle forces can alter the stresses in the implants with respect to pure moment loading. A musculoskeletal model and a finite element model sharing the same anatomy were built and validated against in vitro data, and coupled in order to drive the finite element model with muscle forces calculated by the musculoskeletal one for a prescribed motion. Intact conditions as well as a L1-L5 posterior fixation with pedicle screws and rods were simulated in flexion-extension and lateral bending. The hardware stresses calculated with the finite element model with instrumentation under simplified and realistic loading conditions were compared. The ROM under simplified loading conditions showed good agreement with in vitro data. As expected, the ROMs between the two types of loading conditions showed relatively small differences. Realistic loading conditions increased the stresses in the pedicle screws and in the posterior rods with respect to simplified loading conditions; an increase of hardware stresses up to 40 MPa in extension for the posterior rods and 57 MPa in flexion for the pedicle screws were observed with respect to simplified loading conditions. This conclusion can be critical for the literature since it means that previous models which used pure moments may have underestimated the stresses in the implants in flexion-extension and in lateral bending.

Assessment of trunk muscle activation and intervertebral load in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis by musculoskeletal modelling approach.

Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is a three-dimensional deformity of the spine, the aetiology and pathogenesis of which are poorly understood. Unfortunately, biomechanical data describing trunk muscle activation and intervertebral load, which can contribute to understanding the pathomechanics of the AIS spine, cannot be measured in vivo due to the invasiveness of the procedures. The present study provides the biomechanical characterization of the spinal loads in scoliotic subjects by exploiting musculoskeletal modelling approach, allowing for calculating biomechanical measures in an assigned posture. A spine model with articulated ribcage previously developed in AnyBody software was applied. The predicted outcomes were evaluated in the upright posture, depending on scoliosis severity and curve type, in a population of 132 scoliotic subjects with mild, moderate, and severe scoliosis. Radiographic-based three dimensional reconstruction of vertebral orientations and scaling of body segments and trunk muscle cross-section area guaranteed geometrical subject-specificity. Validation analysis supporting the application of the model was performed. Trunk muscles were found more activated in the convex side of the scoliotic curve, in agreement with reference in vivo measurements, with progressive increase with scoliosis severity. The intervertebral lateral shear was found positively correlated with the severity of the scoliosis, demonstrating that the transferred load is not a priori orthogonal to vertebral endplate in the frontal plane, and thus questioning the assumption of the 'follower load' approach in case of experimental or computational study on the scoliotic spine. The study opens the way for the subject-specific characterization of scoliosis in assigned loading and motion conditions.

The use of triangular implants to enhance sacropelvic fixation: a finite element investigation.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Long thoracolumbar fixation and fusion have become a consolidated treatment for severe spinal disorders. Concomitant sacropelvic fixation with S2 alar-iliac (S2AI) screws is frequently performed to limit instrumentation failure and pseudarthrosis at the lumbosacral junction. PURPOSE: This study explored the use of triangular titanium implants in different configurations in which the implants supplemented standard sacropelvic fixation with S2AI screws in order to further increase the stability of S2AI fixation. STUDY DESIGN: Finite element study. METHODS: Four T10-pelvis instrumented models were built: pedicle screws and rods in T10-S1 (PED); pedicle screws and rods in T10-S1, and bilateral S2 alar-iliac screws (S2AI); pedicle screws and rods in T10-S1, bilateral S2AI screws, and triangular implants inserted bilaterally in a sacral alar-iliac trajectory (Tri-SAI); pedicle screws and rods in T10-S1, bilateral S2AI screws and two bilateral triangular titanium implants inserted in a lateral trajectory (Tri-Lat). The models were tested under pure moments of 7.5 Nm in flexion-extension, lateral bending and axial rotation. RESULTS: SIJ motion was reduced by 50% to 66% after S2AI fixation; the addition of triangular titanium implants in either a SAI or a lateral trajectory further reduced it. S2AI, Tri-SAI, and Tri-Lat resulted in significantly lower stresses in S1 pedicle screws when compared to PED. Triangular implants had a protective effect on the maximal stresses in S2AI screws, especially when placed in the SAI trajectory. Sacropelvic fixation did not have any protective effect on the posterior rods. CONCLUSIONS: Supplementing S2AI screws with triangular implants had a protective effect on the S2AI screws themselves, as well as the S1 pedicle screws, in the tested model. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Triangular implants can substantially reduce the residual flexibility of the SIJ with respect to S2AI fixation alone, suggesting a possible role in patients needing reinforced fixation. In vivo investigation is needed to determine if these in vitro effects translate into clinically important differences.