Biomechanical evaluation of modified and traditional cortical bone trajectory technique on adjacent segment degeneration in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion-finite element analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Modified cortical bone trajectory (MCBT) technique was proposed by our team in previous studies, but its biomechanical properties at adjacent segments have not been discussed yet. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to investigate the biomechanical properties of modified cortical bone trajectory (MCBT) technique on adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) in transforaminal intradiscal lumbar disc fusion (TLIF) compare to traditional bone trajectory (TT) technique and cortical bone trajectory (CBT) technique. METHODS: The four human cadaveric lumbar specimens were provided by the anatomy teaching and research department of Xinjiang Medical University and four intact finite element models of the L1-S1 segment were generated. For each of these, three transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion procedures with three different fixation techniques were reconstructed at the L4-L5 segment, as follows: TT-TT (TT at both L4 and L5 segments), CBT-CBT (CBT at both L4 and L5 segments), MCBT-MCBT (MCBT at both L4 and L5 segments). The range of motion and von Mises stress of the intervertebral disc of the L3-L4 and L5-S1 segments were recorded with a 400N compressive load and 7.5 Nm moments in flexion, extension, left-right bending, and left-right rotation. RESULTS: The peak ROM of the L3-L4 segment in the MCBT-MCBT group was reduced by 10.5%, 6.1%, 12.2%, 4.1%, and 1.5% in flexion, extension, left-right bending, and left rotation compared to the TT-TT group and reduced by 1.8%, 5.5%, 10.0%, 12.8%, and 8.8% in flexion, left-right bending, and left-right rotation compared to the CBT-CBT group, respectively. The MCBT-MCBT group has the lowest peak ROM of the L3-L4 segment in flexion, left bending, and right rotation, the lowest peak ROM of the L5-S1 segment in extension and right rotation, and the lowest peak von Mises stress of the intervertebral disc at the L5-S1 segment in right rotation compared to the TT-TT and CBT-CBT group. In addition, the peak von Mises stress at the L3-L4 segment was lowest and more dispersed in all motions, the MCBT-MCBT group exhibited lower peak ROM of the L5-S1 segment in flexion, extension, and right rotation, and showed lower peak von Mises stress of the disc at the L5-S1 segment in flexion, extension, and right rotation compared with the TT-TT group. CONCLUSION: The modified cortical bone trajectory technique may have a beneficial effect on reducing the incidence of ASD in the L4-L5 TLIF model compared to the traditional bone trajectory technique and cortical bone trajectory technique.

Hybrid cortical bone trajectory and modified cortical bone trajectory techniques in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion at L4-L5 segment: A finite element analysis.

Background: The academia has increasingly acknowledged the superior biomechanical performance of the hybrid fixation technique in recent years. However, there is a lack of research on the hybrid fixation technique using BCS (Bilateral Cortical Screws) and BMCS (Bilateral Modified Cortical Screws). This study aims to investigate the biomechanical performance of the BCS and BMCS hybrid fixation technique in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) at the L4-L5 segment in a complete lumbar-sacral finite element model. Methods: Three cadaver specimens are used to construct three lumbar-sacral finite element models. The biomechanical properties of various fixation technologies (BCS-BCS, BMCS-BMCS, BMCS-BCS, and BCS-BMCS) are evaluated at the L4-5 segment with a TLIF procedure conducted, including the range of motion (ROM) of the L4-5 segment, as well as the stress experienced by the cage, screws, and rods. The testing is conducted under specific loading conditions, including a compressive load of 400 N and a torque of 7.5Nm, subjecting the model to simulate flexion, extension, lateral bending, and rotation. Results: No significant variations are seen in the ROM at the L4-5 segment when comparing the four fixation procedures during flexion and extension. However, when it comes to lateral bending and rotation, the ROM is ordered in descending order as BCS-BCS, BCS-BMCS, BMCS-BMCS, and BMCS-BCS. The maximum stress experienced by the cage is observed to be highest within the BMCS-BCS technique during movements including flexion, extension, and lateral bending. Conversely, the BMCS-BMCS technique exhibits the highest cage stress levels during rotational movements. The stress applies to the screws and rods order the sequence of BCS-BCS, BCS-BMCS, BMCS-BCS, and BMCS-BMCS throughout all four working conditions. Conclusion: The BMCS-BCS technique shows better biomechanical performance with less ROM and lower stress on the internal fixation system compared to other fixation techniques. BMCS-BMCS technology has similar mechanical performance to BMCS-BCS but has more contact area between screws and cortical bone, making it better for patients with severe osteoporosis.

The Method of Portal Making in Lumbar Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Surgery with Different Operative Approaches According to the Constant Anatomical Landmarks of the Lumbar Spine: A Review of the Literature.

STUDY DESIGN: Review. OBJECTIVE: Unilateral Biportal Endoscopy (UBE) is a minimally invasive surgery that is gaining recognition and being employed in clinical practice. Nevertheless, the precise method for determining UBE portals' location varies depending on the originator's preferences or the anatomical structure's proximity to the portal positions. Consequently, the relationship among UBE portals' locations is messy. This study aims to elaborate on the specific portal localization and explore the positional association and commonality among different UBE approaches' portals. METHODS: The following keywords are used to search in the PubMed, Ovid, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, SpringerLink, Scopus, CNKI, and Wanfang database: "Biportal endoscopic spinal surgery", "Two portal endoscopic spinal surgery", "Percutaneous biportal endoscopic decompression", "Unilateral biportal endoscopy", "Irrigation endoscopic discectomy", "UBE" and "BESS". RESULTS: After screening, 29 pieces of literature are included. The study summarizes different UBE approach portal localizations, categorized by fusion or non-fusion surgery and pathological classification. The study presents an inaugural method for categorizing the lumber into four surgical intervals based on bone landmarks and assigns different UBE approaches to the appropriate intervals based on their characteristics, making the selection of UBE surgical approaches' portal locations more flexible. Additionally, the study provides an overview of the indications, complications, and distinct benefits associated with each interval, further refining the novel UBE portal interval localization method. CONCLUSION: The study clarifies the interrelationship and commonality between the portals of different UBE approaches and proposes a new UBE portal interval localization method to enhance surgeons' understanding and proficiency in UBE procedures.

Anatomical and imaging measurements of the angle between the axis of the lumbar pedicle and lateral isthmus margin and its clinical significance.

BACKGROUND: This study aims to explore the measurement of the angle between the axis of the pedicle and the lateral margin of the isthmus on the lumbar spine, and investigate its clinical significance. METHODS: The angle was measured on 120 normal adults' X-ray and 25 dry anatomical specimens. 60 screws were placed by junior residents on 6 wet specimens through the freehand technique. 30 screws were placed on one side with their original experience. After learning the techniques mentioned in the study, 30 screws were placed on the other side. The specimens were examined by X-ray and CT, and the angles of the screw paths and the integrity of the pedicle were evaluated. RESULTS: The angles of 120 subjects and 25 anatomical specimens show a gradually increasing trend. The differences among each segment were statistically significant (P < 0.05), but the difference in the same segment between the X-ray and the anatomical specimens was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). Furthermore, the differences in L1, L2, and L3 between the two genders were not statistically significant (P > 0.05). However, the angles were larger in female group than in male group in L4 and L5, and the differences were statistically significant (P < 0.05). The difference in the deviation rate of screw placement before and after the learning was statistically significant only in the L5 segment (P < 0.05). The difference in overall excellence rate was statistically significant (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The measurement of the angle between the axis of the pedicle and the lateral margin of the isthmus on the lumbar can improve the accuracy of the lumbar sagittal screw angle.