Do expandable cage size and number of cages matter in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion at L5-S1? A comparative biomechanical analysis using finite element modeling.

OBJECTIVE: Expandable transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) cages were designed to address the limitations of static cages. Bilateral cage insertion can potentially enhance stability, fusion rates, and segmental lordosis. However, the benefits of unilateral versus bilateral expandable cages with varying sizes in TLIF remain unclear. This study used a validated finite element spine model to compare the biomechanical properties of L5-S1 TLIF by using differently sized expandable cages inserted unilaterally or bilaterally. METHODS: A finite element model of X-PAC expandable lumbar cages was created and used at the L5-S1 level. This model had cage dimensions of 9 mm in height, 15° in lordosis, and varying widths and lengths. Various placements (unilateral vs bilateral) and sizes were examined under pure moment loading to evaluate range of motion, adjacent-segment motion, and endplate stress. RESULTS: Stability at the L5-S1 level decreased when smaller cages were used in both the unilateral and bilateral cage models. In the unilateral model, cage 1 (the smallest cage) resulted in 47.9% more motion at the L5-S1 level compared to cage 5 (the largest cage) in flexion, as well as 64.8% more motion in extension. Similarly, in the bilateral TLIF model, bilateral cage 1 led to 49.4% more motion at the L5-S1 level in flexion and 73.4% more motion in extension compared to bilateral cage 5. Unilateral insertion of cage 5 provided superior stability in flexion and surpassed cages 1-3 in extension when compared to cages inserted either unilaterally or bilaterally. Reduced motion at L5-S1 correlated with increased adjacent-segment motion at L4-5. Bilateral TLIF resulted in greater adjacent-segment motion compared to unilateral TLIF with the same-size cages. Inferior endplates experienced higher stress during flexion and extension than superior endplates, with this difference being more pronounced in the bilateral model. In bilateral cage placement, stress differences ranged from 46.3% to 60.0%, while they ranged from 1.1% to 9.6% in unilateral cages. Qualitative analysis revealed increased focal stress in unilateral cages versus bilateral cages. CONCLUSIONS: The authors' study shows that using a large unilateral TLIF cage may offer better stability than the bilateral insertion of smaller cages. While large bilateral cages increase adjacent-segment motion, they also provide a uniform stress distribution on the endplates. These findings deepen our understanding of the biomechanics of the available expandable TLIF cages.

Finite element modeling of the human cervical spinal cord and its applications: A systematic review.

Background Context: Finite element modeling (FEM) is an established tool to analyze the biomechanics of complex systems. Advances in computational techniques have led to the increasing use of spinal cord FEMs to study cervical spinal cord pathology. There is considerable variability in the creation of cervical spinal cord FEMs and to date there has been no systematic review of the technique. The aim of this study was to review the uses, techniques, limitations, and applications of FEMs of the human cervical spinal cord. Methods: A literature search was performed through PubMed and Scopus using the words finite element analysis, spinal cord, and biomechanics. Studies were selected based on the following inclusion criteria: (1) use of human spinal cord modeling at the cervical level; (2) model the cervical spinal cord with or without the osteoligamentous spine; and (3) the study should describe an application of the spinal cord FEM. Results: Our search resulted in 369 total publications, 49 underwent reviews of the abstract and full text, and 23 were included in the study. Spinal cord FEMs are used to study spinal cord injury and trauma, pathologic processes, and spine surgery. Considerable variation exists in the derivation of spinal cord geometries, mathematical models, and material properties. Less than 50% of the FEMs incorporate the dura mater, cerebrospinal fluid, nerve roots, and denticulate ligaments. Von Mises stress, and strain of the spinal cord are the most common outputs studied. FEM offers the opportunity for dynamic simulation, but this has been used in only four studies. Conclusions: Spinal cord FEM provides unique insight into the stress and strain of the cervical spinal cord in various pathological conditions and allows for the simulation of surgical procedures. Standardization of modeling parameters, anatomical structures and inclusion of patient-specific data are necessary to improve the clinical translation.

Determinants of spinal cord stress and strain in degenerative cervical myelopathy: a patient-specific finite element study.

Degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is the commonest cause of spinal cord dysfunction in older adults and is characterized by chronic cervical spinal cord compression. Spinal cord stress and strain during neck motion are also known contributors to the pathophysiology of DCM, yet these factors are not routinely assessed for surgical planning. The aim of this study was to measure spinal cord stress/strain in DCM using patient-specific 3D finite element models (FEMs) and determine whether spinal cord compression is the primary determinant of spinal cord stress/strain. Three-dimensional patient-specific FEMs were created for six DCM patients (mild [n = 2], moderate [n = 2] and severe [n = 2]). Flexion and extension of the cervical spine were simulated with a pure moment load of 2 Nm. Segmental spinal cord von Mises stress and maximum principal strain were measured. Measures of spinal cord compression and segmental range of motion (ROM) were included in a regression analysis to determine associations with spinal cord stress and strain. Segmental ROM in flexion-extension and axial rotation was independently associated with spinal cord stress (p < 0.001) and strain (p < 0.001), respectively. This relationship was not seen for lateral bending. Segmental ROM had a stronger association with spinal stress and strain as compared to spinal cord compression. Compared to the severity of spinal cord compression, segmental ROM is a stronger determinant spinal cord stress and strain. Surgical procedures that address segmental ROM in addition to cord compression may best optimize spinal cord biomechanics in DCM.

Effect of Cervical Stenosis and Rate of Impact on Risk of Spinal Cord Injury During Whiplash Injury.

STUDY DESIGN: Finite Element Study. OBJECTIVE: To determine the risk of spinal cord injury with pre-existing cervical stenosis during a whiplash injury. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Patients with cervical spinal stenosis are often cautioned on the potential increased risk of spinal cord injury (SCI) from minor trauma such as rear impact whiplash injuries. However, there is no consensus on the degree of canal stenosis or the rate of impact that predisposes cervical SCI from minor trauma. METHODS: A previously validated three-dimensional finite element model of the human head-neck complex with the spinal cord and activated cervical musculature was used. Rear impact acceleration was applied at 1.8 m/s and 2.6 m/s. Progressive spinal stenosis was simulated at the C5 to C6 segment, from 14 mm to 6 mm, at 2 mm intervals of ventral disk protrusion. Spinal cord von Mises stress and maximum principal strain were extracted and normalized with respect to the 14 mm spine at each cervical spine level from C2 to C7. RESULTS: The mean segmental range of motion was 7.3 degrees at 1.8 m/s and 9.3 degrees at 2.6 m/s. Spinal cord stress above the threshold for SCI was noted at C5 to C6 for 6 mm stenosis at 1.8 m/s and 2.6 m/s. The segment (C6-C7) inferior to the level of maximum stenosis also showed increasing stress and strain with a higher rate of impact. For 8 mm stenosis, spinal cord stress exceeded SCI thresholds only at 2.6 m/s. Spinal cord strain above SCI thresholds were only noted in the 6 mm stenosis model at 2.6 m/s. CONCLUSION: Increased spinal stenosis and rate of impact are associated with greater magnitude and spatial distribution of spinal cord stress and strain during a whiplash injury. Spinal canal stenosis of 6 mm was associated with consistent elevation of spinal cord stress and strain above SCI thresholds at 2.6 m/s.

Differences in spinal cord biomechanics after laminectomy, laminoplasty, and laminectomy with fusion for degenerative cervical myelopathy.

OBJECTIVE: Spinal cord stress/strain during neck motion contributes to spinal cord dysfunction in degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM), yet the effect of surgery on spinal cord biomechanics is unknown. It is expected that motion-preserving and fusion surgeries for DCM will have distinct effects on spinal cord biomechanics. The aim of this study was to compare changes in spinal cord biomechanics after laminectomy with fusion, laminectomy, and laminoplasty using a patient-specific finite element model (FEM) for DCM. METHODS: A patient-specific FEM of the cervical spine and spinal cord was created using MRI from a subject with mild DCM. Multilevel laminectomy with fusion, laminectomy, and laminoplasty were simulated for DCM using the patient-specific FEM. Spinal cord von Mises stress and maximum principal strain during neck flexion-extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation were recorded. Segmental range of motion, intradiscal pressure, and capsular ligament strain were also measured. FEM outputs were calculated as a change with respect to the preoperative values and compared between the three models. RESULTS: Across the surgical levels, spinal cord stress increased after laminectomy for neck flexion (+50%), neck extension (+37.8%), and axial rotation (+23%). Similarly, spinal cord strain increased in neck extension (+118.4%) and axial rotation (+75.1%) after laminectomy. Laminoplasty was associated with greater spinal cord stress in neck flexion (+57.4%) and increased strain in lateral bending (+56.7%) and axial rotation (+20.9%). Compared with laminectomy and laminoplasty, spinal cord biomechanics for laminectomy with fusion revealed significantly reduced median extension stress (13.7 kPa vs 9.7 kPa, p = 0.03), lateral bending strain (0.01 vs 0.007, p = 0.007), axial rotation stress (3.7 kPa vs 2.1 kPa, p = 0.04), and axial rotation strain (0.017 vs 0.009, p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Spinal cord strain decreased in neck flexion in all three models, yet spinal cord stress increased with neck flexion for laminectomy and laminoplasty. Changes in spinal cord biomechanics for laminoplasty parallel those for laminectomy with fusion except during neck flexion, lateral bending, and axial rotation. Compared with motion-preserving approaches such as laminectomy and laminoplasty, laminectomy with fusion was associated with the lowest spinal cord stress and strain in flexion-extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation of the neck.

Spinal Cord Stress After Anterior Cervical Diskectomy and Fusion: Results from a Patient-Specific Finite Element Model.

Degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is the commonest cause of cervical spinal cord dysfunction in older adults and is characterized by spinal cord compression and stress during neck motion. Although surgical decompression eliminates static spinal cord compression, cord stress resulting from flexion-extension motion of the spinal column has not been determined for single and multi-level surgical interventions. The effect of surgery on spinal cord stress is expected to change with the number of surgical levels as well as patient-specific anatomy. Using a MRI-derived patient-specific finite element model, we simulated 1-, 2- and 3-level anterior cervical diskectomy and fusion (ACDF) surgery for DCM. A substantial decrease in spinal cord stress at the level of spinal cord decompression was noted in all simulations. This was associated with a considerable increase in spinal cord stress rostral to the surgical level, and the magnitude of stress was higher in multi-level surgery. Increased spinal cord stress at the rostral adjacent segment correlated with increased segmental range of motion (r = 0.69, p = 0.002) and disk pressure (r = 0.57, p = 0.05). Together, these results indicate that ACDF for DCM is associated with adverse spinal cord stress patterns adjacent to the fusion construct, and further research is needed to determine if the altered stress is associated with clinical outcomes after surgery for DCM.