Biomechanics of sacroiliac joint fixation using lag screws: a cadaveric study.

BACKGROUND: Iliosacral screw placement is ubiquitous and now part of the surgeon's pelvic trauma armamentarium. More recent evidence supports sacroiliac arthrodesis for treating sacroiliac joint (SIJ) dysfunction in select patients. Regardless of the surgical indication, there are currently no studies examining lag screw compression biomechanics across the SIJ. The objective of this biomechanical investigation was to quantify iliosacral implant compressive loads and to examine the insertion torque and compressive load profile over time. METHODS: Eight human cadaveric pelvic specimens underwent SIJ fixation at S1 and S2 using 11.5 and 10.0 mm iFuse-TORQ Lag implants, respectively, and standard 7.3 mm trauma lag screws. Load decay analysis was performed, and insertion and removal torques were measured. RESULTS: For both implants at S1 and S2 levels, the load relaxed 50% in approximately 67 min. Compressive load decay was approximately 70% on average occurring approximately 15 h post-insertion. Average insertion torque for the 11.5 mm TORQ implant at S1 was significantly greater than the trauma lag screw. Similarly, at S2, insertion torque of the 10.0 mm TORQ implant was greater than the trauma lag screw. At S1, removal torque for the 11.5 mm TORQ implant was higher than the trauma lag screw; there was no significant difference in the removal torque at S2. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we found that a novel posterior pelvic implant with a larger diameter, roughened surface, and dual pitch threads achieved improved insertion and removal torques compared to a standard screw. Load relaxation characteristics were similar between all implants.

Biomechanical Effects of Facet Joint Violation After Single-Level Lumbar Fusion With Transpedicular Screw and Rod Instrumentation.

STUDY DESIGN: In vitro biomechanical study. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the biomechanical effects of facet joint violation (FV) on mobility and optically tracked intervertebral disc (IVD) surface strains at the upper level adjacent to L4-5 pedicle screw-rod fixation. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: FV is a complication that can occur when placing lumbar pedicle screws; the reported incidence is as high as 50%. However, little is known about how FV affects superior adjacent-level spinal stability, and especially IVD strain, after lumbar fusion. METHODS: Fourteen cadaveric L3-S1 specimens underwent L4-5 pedicle-rod fixation, 7 in the facet joint preservation (FP) group and 7 in the FV group. Specimens were tested multidirectionally under pure moment loading (7.5 Nm). Colored maps of maximum (ε1) and minimum (ε2) principal surface strain changes on the lateral L3-4 disc were generated, with the surface divided into 4 quarters anterior to posterior (Q1, Q2, Q3, and Q4, respectively) for subregional analyses. Range of motion (ROM) and IVD strain were normalized to intact upper adjacent-level and compared between the groups using analysis of variance. Statistical significance was set at P <0.05. RESULTS: Normalized ROM was significantly greater with FV vs. FP in flexion (11% greater; P =0.04), right lateral bending (16% greater; P =0.03), and right axial rotation (23% greater; P =0.04). Normalized L3-4 IVD ε1 during right lateral bending was greater on average for the FV group than the FP group: Q1, 18% greater; Q2, 12% greater; Q3, 40% greater ( P <0.001); Q4, 9% greater. Normalized ε2 values during left axial rotation were greater in the FV group, the highest increase being 25% in Q3 ( P =0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Facet joint violation during single-level pedicle screw-rod fixation was associated with increased superior adjacent level mobility and alteration of disc surface strains, with significant increases in selected regions and directions of loading.

Biomechanical Assessment of a Novel Sharp-Tipped Screw for 1-Step Minimally Invasive Pedicle Screw Placement Under Navigation.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to assess the pullout force of a novel sharp-tipped screw developed for single-step, minimally invasive pedicle screw placement guided by neuronavigation compared with the pullout force for traditional screws. METHODS: A total of 60 human cadaveric lumbar pedicles were studied. Three different screw insertion techniques were compared: (A) Jamshidi needle and Kirschner wire without tapping; (B) Jamshidi needle and Kirschner wire with tapping; and (C) sharp-tipped screw insertion. Pullout tests were performed at a displacement rate of 10 mm/min recorded at 20 Hz. Mean values of these parameters were compared using paired t tests (left vs right in the same specimen): A vs B, A vs C, and B vs C. Additionally, 3 L1-L5 spine models were used for timing each screw insertion technique for a total of 10 screw insertions for each technique. Insertion times were compared using 1-way analysis of variance. RESULTS: The mean pullout force for insertion technique A was 1462.3 (597.5) N; for technique B, it was 1693.5 (805.0) N; and for technique C, it was 1319.0 (735.7) N. There was no statistically significant difference in pullout force between techniques (P > 0.08). The average insertion time for condition C was significantly less than that for conditions A and B (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The pullout force of the novel sharp-tipped screw placement technique is equivalent to that of traditional techniques. The sharp-tipped screw placement technique appears biomechanically viable and has the advantage of saving time during insertion. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Single-step screw placement using high resolution 3-dimensional navigation has the potential to streamline workflow and reduce operative time.

Rod Attachment Induces Significant Strain in Lumbosacral Fixation.

STUDY DESIGN: This was a laboratory investigation. OBJECTIVE: Rod attachment can induce significant pedicle screw-and-rod pre- strain that may predispose the instrumentation to failure. This study investigated how in vitro L5-S1 rod strain and S1 screw strain during rod-screw attachment (pre-strain) compared with strains recorded during pure-moment bending ( test- strain). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The lumbosacral junction is highly vulnerable to construct failure due to rod fatigue fracture, sacral screw pull-out, and screw fatigue fracture. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twelve cadaveric specimens were instrumented with L2-ilium pedicle screws and rod. Strain gauges on contoured rods and sacral screws recorded strains during sequential rod-to-screw tightening (pre-strains). The same instrumented constructs were immediately tested in a 6-degree-of-freedom apparatus under continuous loading to 7.5 Nm in multidirectional bending while recording instrumentation test-strains. Rod and screw pre-strains and test-strains were compared using 1-way repeated-measures analysis of variance followed by Holm-Sidák paired analysis (significant at P <0.05). RESULTS: The mean first (171±192 µE) and second (322±269 µE) rod attachment pre-strains were comparable to mean test-strains during flexion (265±109 µE) and extension (315±125 µE, P ≥0.13). The mean rod attachment pre-strain was significantly greater than mean test-strains during bidirectional lateral bending (40±32 µE ipsilateral and 39±32 µE contralateral, P <0.001) and axial rotation (72±60 µE ipsilateral and 60±57 µE contralateral, P <0.001). The mean first and second sacral screw pre-strains during rod attachment (1.03±0.66 and 1.39±1.00 Nm, respectively) did not differ significantly ( P =0.41); however, the mean sacral screw pre-strain during final (second) rod attachment was significantly greater than screw test-strains during all directions of movement (≤0.81 Nm, P ≤0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Instrumentation pre-strains imposed during in vitro rod-screw attachment of seemingly well-contoured rods in L2-ilium fixation are comparable to, and at times greater than, strains experienced during in vitro bending. Spine surgeons should be aware of the biomechanical consequences of rod contouring and attachment on construct vulnerability.

Biomechanical Effects of Proximal Polyetheretherketone Rod Extension on the Upper Instrumented and Adjacent Levels in a Human Long-Segment Construct: A Cadaveric Model.

OBJECTIVE: The high mechanical stress zone at the sudden transition from a rigid to flexible region is involved in proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) physiopathology. We evaluated the biomechanical performance of polyetheretherketone (PEEK) rods used as a nontraditional long semirigid transition phase from a long-segment metallic rod construct to the nonfused thoracic spine. METHODS: Pure moment range of motion (ROM) tests (7.5 Nm) were performed on 7 cadaveric spine segments followed by compression (200 N). Specimens were tested in the following conditions: (1) intact; (2) T10-pelvis pedicle screws and rods (PSRs); and (3) extending the proximal construct to T6 using PEEK rods (PSR+PEEK). T10-11 rod strain, T9 anterolateral bone strain, and T10 screw bending moments were analyzed. RESULTS: At the upper instrumented vertebra (UIV)+1, PSR+PEEK versus PSR significantly decreased ROM in flexion (115%, p = 0.02), extension (104%, p = 0.003), left lateral bending (46%, p = 0.02), and right lateral bending (63%, p = 0.008). Also, at UIV+1, PSR+PEEK versus intact significantly decreased ROM in flexion (111%, p = 0.01) and extension (105%, p = 0.003). The UIV+1 anterior column bone strain was significantly reduced with PSR+PEEK versus PSR during right lateral bending (p = 0.02). Rod strain polarities reversed with PEEK rods in all loading directions except compression. CONCLUSION: Extending a long-segment construct using PEEK rods caused a decrease in adjacent-level hypermobility as a consequence of long-segment immobilization and also redistributed the strain on the UIV and adjacent levels, which might contribute to PJK physiopathology. Further studies are necessary to observe the clinical outcomes of this technique.

Influence of Spinal Deformity Construct Design on Adjacent-Segment Biomechanics.

BACKGROUND: Adjacent level degeneration is a precursor to construct failure in adult spinal deformity surgery, but whether construct design affects adjacent level degeneration risk remains unclear. Here we present a biomechanical profile of common deformity correction constructs and assess adjacent level biomechanics. METHODS: Standard nondestructive flexibility tests (7.5 Nm) were performed on 21 cadaveric specimens: 14 pedicle subtraction osteotomies (PSOs) and 7 anterior column realignment (ACR) constructs. The ranges of motion (ROM) at the adjacent free level in flexion, extension, axial rotation, and lateral bending were measured and analyzed. RESULTS: ACR constructs had a lower ROM change on flexion at the proximal adjacent free level than constructs with PSO (1.02 vs. 1.32, normalized to the intact specimen, P < 0.01). Lateral lumbar interbody fusion adjacent to PSO and 4 rods limits ROM at the free level more effectively than transforaminal interbody fusion and 2 rods in correction constructs with PSO. Use of 2 screws to anchor the ACR interbody further decreased ROM at the proximal adjacent free level on flexion, but adding 4 rods in this setting added no further limitation to adjacent segment motion. CONCLUSIONS: ACR constructs have less ROM change at the adjacent level compared to PSO constructs. Among constructs with ACR, anchoring the ACR interbody with 2 screws reduces motion at the proximal adjacent free level. When PSOs are used, lateral lumbar interbody fusion adjacent to the PSO level has a greater reduction in adjacent-segment motion than transforaminal interbody fusion, suggesting that deformity construct configuration influences proximal adjacent-segment biomechanics.

Subtle segmental angle changes of single-level lumbar fusions and adjacent-level biomechanics: cadaveric study of optically measured disc strain.

OBJECTIVE: Changes to segmental lordosis at a single level may affect adjacent-level biomechanics and overall spinal alignment with an iatrogenic domino effect commonly seen in adult spinal deformity. This study investigated the effects of different segmental angles of single-level lumbar fixation on stability and principal strain across the surface of the adjacent-level disc. METHODS: Seven human cadaveric L3-S1 specimens were instrumented at L4-5 and tested in 3 conditions: 1) neutral native angle ("neutral"), 2) increasing angle by 5° of lordosis ("lordosis"), and 3) decreasing angle by 5° of kyphosis ("kyphosis"). Pure moment loads (7.5 Nm) were applied in flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation, followed by 400 N of axial compression alone and together with pure moments. Range of motion (ROM), principal maximum strain (E1), and principal minimum strain (E2) across different surface subregions of the upper adjacent-level disc (L3-4) were optically assessed. Larger magnitudes of either E1 or E2 indicate larger tissue deformations and represent indirect measures of increased stress. RESULTS: At the superior adjacent level, a significant increase in ROM was observed in kyphosis and lordosis versus neutral in flexion (p ≤ 0.001) and extension (p ≤ 0.02). ROM was increased in lordosis versus neutral (p = 0.03) and kyphosis (p = 0.004) during compression. ROM increased in kyphosis versus neutral and lordosis (both p = 0.03) in compression plus extension. Lordosis resulted in increased E1 across the midposterior subregion of the disc (Q3) versus neutral during right lateral bending (p = 0.04); lordosis and kyphosis resulted in decreased E1 in Q3 versus neutral with compression (p ≤ 0.03). Lordosis decreased E1 in Q3 versus neutral during compression plus flexion (p = 0.01), whereas kyphosis increased E1 in all quartiles and increased E2 in the midanterior subregion versus lordosis in compression plus flexion (p ≤ 0.047). Kyphosis decreased E1 in Q3 (p = 0.02) and E2 in the anterior-most subregion of the disc (Q1) (p = 0.006) versus neutral, whereas lordosis decreased E1 in Q3 (p = 0.008) versus neutral in compression plus extension. CONCLUSIONS: Lumbar spine monosegmental fixation with 5° offset from the neutral individual segmental angle altered the motion and principal strain magnitudes at the upper adjacent disc, with induced kyphosis resulting in larger principal strains compared with lordosis. Segmental alignment of single-level fusion influences adjacent-segment biomechanics, and suboptimal alignment may play a role in the clinical development of adjacent-segment disease.

Use of digital imaging correlation techniques for full-field strain distribution analysis of implantable devices and tissue in spinal biomechanics research.

Few studies have used optical full-field surface strain mapping to study spinal biomechanics. We used a commercial digital imaging correlation (DIC) system to (1) compare posterior surface strains on spinal rods with those obtained from conventional foil strain gauges, (2) quantify bony vertebral body and intervertebral disc (IVD) surface strains on 3 L3-S cadaveric spines during gold-standard flexibility tests (7.5-Nm flexion-extension and 400-N compression), and (3) report our experience with the application and feasibility of DIC to comprehensively map strain in spinal biomechanics. Spinal rods were tested under zero load and using ASTM F1717 standard. For rod strain measures, the largest mean bias offset and baseline noise standard deviation under zero load for DIC were 7.6 µÎµ and 33.7 µÎµ, respectively. For tissue measures, the largest mean bias offset was 8 µÎµ for ε1 and -55 µÎµ for ε2 with baseline noise standard deviations of 19 µÎµ and 26 µÎµ, respectively. On average, DIC rod strain measurements were 5.3% less than strain gauge measurements throughout the load range. Principal IVD and bony surface strains were consistently measurable and showed marked regional differences in strain patterns under different load conditions. Strains measured on spinal rods using DIC techniques reasonably agreed with standard strain gauge measurements. Subregional strain analyses on soft and hard spinal tissues during standard flexibility tests were feasible. Optical strain mapping is a viable, accurate, and promising measurement technique for novel spinal biomechanical studies.

Pedicle Subtraction Osteotomy Construct Optimization: A Cadaveric Study of Various Multirod and Interbody Configurations.

STUDY DESIGN: Fourteen cadaveric specimens were separated into two groups: (1) L3 pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO) with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) or (2) lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF). A 2-rod configuration (2R) was compared with two supplemental rod configurations: 4-rod (4R) with accessory rods (ARs) using connectors or 4R with satellite rods (SRs) without connectors. OBJECTIVE: Compare PSO constructs with different rod configurations and adjacent-level interbody support. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Supplemental rods and anterior column support enhance biomechanical performance. METHODS: Pure moments were applied in (1) intact, (2) pedicle screws and rods, (3) PSO + 2R, (4) 4R AR, and (5) 4R SR conditions. Primary and supplemental rods had strain gauges across the index level. Sacral screw bending moments and range of motion (ROM) were recorded. RESULTS: For TLIF, AR decreased ROM during flexion (P = 0.02) and extension (P < 0.001) versus 2R. For LLIF, AR and SR decreased motion versus 2R during left (AR: P  = 0.03; SR: P  = 0.04) and right (AR: P  = 0.002; SR: P  = 0.01) axial rotation. For LLIF, sacral screw strain increased with SR compared with AR in compression and right lateral bending (P ≤ 0.03). During lateral bending, rod strain increased with PSO+TLIF+SR versus PSO+LLIF+2R and PSO+LLIF+AR (P ≤ 0.02). For LLIF, SR configuration increased rod strain versus AR during flexion, extension, and lateral bending (P≤ 0.01); for TLIF, rod strain increased with SR versus AR during extension (P = 0.03). For LLIF, AR configuration increased posterior supplemental rod strain versus SR during flexion (P = 0.02) and lateral bending (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Both supplemental rod configurations reduced motion in both groups. Constructs with the SR configuration increased the primary rod strain and the sacral screw bending moment compared with AR constructs, which can share strain. Deep-seated SRs, which have become increasingly popular, may be more vulnerable to failure than ARs. LLIF provided more stability in sagittal plane. Protective effect of supplemental rods on rod strain was more effective with TLIF.Level of Evidence: NA.

Optimizing Cervicothoracic Junction Biomechanics after C7 Pedicle Subtraction Osteotomy: A Cadaveric Study of Stability and Rod Strain.

OBJECTIVE: To compare biomechanical stability and rod strain among uniform rod (UR), tapered rod (TR), and UR+accessory rod (AR) constructs in a human cadaveric C7 pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO) model of cervical deformity correction. METHODS: Fourteen human cadaveric C2-T4 specimens were divided into 2 statistically equivalent groups. Specimens were instrumented from C2 to T3, and a 25° PSO was performed at C7. Group 1 was instrumented with 3.5-mm to 5.5-mm titanium TRs, and group 2 received 4.0-mm titanium URs. The UR group was also tested with lateral 4.0-mm titanium ARs (UR+AR) at C5-T2. All conditions were tested with 2.0 Nm pure moment and 70 N compressive load. Intervertebral range of motion (ROM) and posterior rod strain (pRS) were measured at C2-C3, T2-T3, and the PSO level. Statistical comparisons used 1-way analysis of variance. RESULTS: ROM was significantly reduced in the TR versus UR construct for right axial rotation (P = 0.04) at the PSO level; ROM with TR was significantly greater than with UR and UR+AR in compression (P ≤ 0.02). At the PSO level, pRS was significantly greater in TR than in UR+AR in flexion, extension, and right axial rotation (P ≤ 0.02). At T2/3, pRS was higher in UR than TR in left axial rotation (P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: C7 PSO is highly destabilizing. Maximal rod strain was concentrated across the PSO and the cranial fixation site. TR provided higher stability than did UR in 1 direction of movement; however, UR+AR provided the greatest reduction of pRS.

Biomechanics of a laterally placed sacroiliac joint fusion device supplemental to S2 alar-iliac fixation in a long-segment adult spinal deformity construct: a cadaveric study of stability and strain distribution.

OBJECTIVE: S2 alar-iliac (S2AI) screw fixation effectively enhances stability in long-segment constructs. Although S2AI fixation provides a single transarticular sacroiliac joint fixation (SIJF) point, additional fixation points may provide greater stability and attenuate screw and rod strain. The objectives of this study were to evaluate changes in stability and pedicle screw and rod strain with extended distal S2AI fixation and with supplemental bilateral integration of two sacroiliac joint fusion devices implanted using a traditional minimally invasive surgical approach. METHODS: Eight L1-pelvis human cadaveric specimens underwent pure moment (7.5 Nm) and compression (400 N) tests under 4 conditions: 1) intact (pure moment loading only); 2) L2-S1 pedicle screw and rod with L5-S1 interbody fusion; 3) added S2AI screws; and 4) added bilateral laterally placed SIJF. Range of motion (ROM), rod strain, and screw-bending moment (S1 and S2AI) were analyzed. RESULTS: Compared with S1 fixation, S2AI fixation significantly reduced L5-S1 ROM in right lateral bending by 50% (0.11°, p = 0.049) and in compression by 39% (0.22°, p = 0.003). Compared with fixation ending at S1, extending fixation with S2AI significantly decreased sacroiliac joint ROM by 52% (0.28°, p = 0.02) in flexion, by 65% (0.48°, p = 0.04) in extension, by 59% (0.76°, p = 0.02) in combined flexion-extension, and by 36% (0.09°, p = 0.02) in left axial rotation. The addition of S2AI screws reduced S1 screw-bending moment during flexion (0.106 Nm [43%], p = 0.046). With S2AI fixation, posterior L5-S1 primary rod strain increased by 124% (159 µE, p = 0.002) in flexion, by 149% (285 µE, p = 0.02) in left axial rotation, and by 99% (254 µE, p = 0.04) in right axial rotation. Compared with S2AI fixation, the addition of SIJF reduced L5-S1 strain during right axial rotation by 6% (28 µE, p = 0.04) and increased L5-S1 strain in extension by 6% (28 µE, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Long-segment constructs ending with S2AI screws created a more stable construct than those ending with S1 screws, reducing lumbosacral and sacroiliac joint motion and S1 screw-bending moment in flexion. These benefits, however, were paired with increased rod strain at the lumbosacral junction. The addition of SIJF to constructs ending at S2AI did not significantly change SI joint ROM or S1 screw bending and reduced S2AI screw bending in compression. SIJF further decreased L5-S1 rod strain in axial rotation and increased it in extension.

Influence of Lumbar Lordosis on Posterior Rod Strain in Long-Segment Construct During Biomechanical Loading: A Cadaveric Study.

OBJECTIVE: The lordotic shape of the lumbar spine differs substantially between individuals. Measuring and recording strain during spinal biomechanical tests is an effective method to infer stresses on spinal implants and predict failure mechanisms. The geometry of the spine may have a significant effect on the resultant force distribution, thereby directly affecting rod strain. METHODS: Seven fresh-frozen cadaveric specimens (T12-sacrum) underwent standard (7.5 Nm) nondestructive sagittal plane tests: flexion and extension. The conditions tested were intact and pedicle screws and rods (PSR) at L1-sacrum. The posterior right rod was instrumented with strain gauges between L3-4 (index level) and the L5-S1 pedicle screw. All specimens underwent lateral radiographs before testing. Lordotic angles encompassing different levels (L5-S1, L4-S1, L3-S1, L2-S1, and L1-S1) were measured and compared with rod strain. Data were analyzed using Pearson correlation analyses. RESULTS: Strong positive correlations were observed between lordosis and posterior rod strain across different conditions. The L3-S1 lordotic angle in the unloaded intact condition correlated with peak rod strain at L3-4 with PSR during flexion (R = 0.76, p = 0.04). The same angle in the unloaded PSR condition correlated with peak strain in the PSR condition during extension (R = -0.79, p = 0.04). The unloaded intact L2-S1 lordotic angle was significantly correlated with rod strain at L3-4 in the PSR condition during flexion (R = 0.85, p = 0.02) and extension (R = -0.85, p = 0.02) and with rod strain at L5-S1 in the PSR condition during flexion (R = 0.84, p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: Lordosis measured on intact and instrumented conditions has strong positive correlations with posterior rod strain in cadaveric testing.

Does the Choice of Spinal Interbody Fusion Approach Significantly Affect Adjacent Segment Mobility?

STUDY DESIGN: Biomechanical study of range of motion (ROM) at the vertebral levels adjacent to the construct of posterior pedicle screw-rod fixation with different types of lumbar interbody fusion techniques (LIF). OBJECTIVE: To investigate the differences in adjacent segment mobility among three types of LIF: lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF), transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Previous studies have concluded that LLIF, TLIF, and PLIF with posterior pedicle screw-rod fixation (PSR) provide equivalent stability in cadaveric specimens and are comparable in fusion rate and functional outcome. However, long-term complications, such as adjacent segment degeneration associated with each type of interbody device, are currently unclear. Little is known about the biomechanical effects of interbody fusion technique on the mobility of adjacent segments. METHODS: Normalized ROM data at the levels adjacent to L3-L4 PSR fixation with three different types of lumbar interbody fusion approaches (LLIF, TLIF, and PLIF) were analyzed. Intact (n = 21) and instrumented (n = 7 per group) L2-L5 cadaveric specimens were tested multidirectionally under pure moment loading (7.5 Nm). Analysis of variance of adjacent segment ROM among the groups was performed. Statistical significance was set at P < 0.05. RESULTS: Normalized ROM was significantly greater with PLIF than with LLIF in all directions at both proximal and distal adjacent segments (P ≤ 0.02) except for axial rotation at the distal adjacent segment (P = 0.07). TLIF also had greater normalized ROM than LLIF during lateral bending at the proximal adjacent segment (P = 0.008) and during flexion, extension, and lateral bending at the distal adjacent segment (P ≤ 0.03). Normalized ROM was not significantly different between PLIF and TLIF. CONCLUSION: The choice of lumbar interbody fusion approach influences adjacent segment motion in a cadaveric model. LLIF had the least adjacent segment motion.Level of Evidence: 3.

In Vitro Biomechanics of Human Cadaveric Cervical Spines With Mature Fusion.

BACKGROUND: This study sought to compare index and adjacent-level biomechanics of cadaveric specimens with mature fusion versus normal spines in intact and acutely fused conditions. METHODS: Eight human cadaveric cervical spines with mature fusion across 1 to 3 levels were studied. Intervertebral angular range of motion (ROM) was determined at fused and adjacent levels during pure moments inducing flexion-extension (FE), lateral bending (LB), and axial rotation (AR). Mature fusion data were compared to data from normal spine specimens tested intact and then with a 1-level anterior plate/graft (fresh fixation). Bone qualities were compared using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry. RESULTS: Mean bone mineral density was significantly greater in mature fusion spines (0.632 ± 0.239 g/cm2) than in normal spines (0.489 ± 0.195 g/cm2) (P < .001). Mean ROM for levels with mature fusion was 42% (FE), 42% (LB), and 29% (AR) of the mean same-level ROM in freshly fixated specimens (P ≤ .045). The mean adjacent-level ROM in spines with mature fusion was less than in normal spines (matched levels) in all directions, with the greatest difference 1 level below fusion (FE: -38%, P < .001; LB: -42%, P < .001; AR: -49%, P = .001), followed by 1 level above fusion (FE: -23%, P = .04; LB: -22%, P = .07; AR: -28%, P = .02) and 2 levels above fusion (FE: -20%, P = .08; LB: -18%, P = .11; AR: -31%, P = .009). Mature fusion reduced the magnitude of coupled LB during AR at C6-7 and C7-T1 (P ≤ .03). CONCLUSION: Cervical spine segments with mature fusion have higher bone mass, are less flexible than freshly fixed spines, and have reduced mobility at adjacent levels.

Biomechanics of open versus minimally invasive deformity correction:​ comparison of stability and rod strain between pedicle subtraction osteotomy and anterior column realignment.

OBJECTIVE: Anterior column realignment (ACR) is a new minimally invasive approach for deformity correction that achieves a degree of lordosis similar to that obtained with pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO). This study compared the biomechanical profiles of ACR with PSO using range of motion (ROM) and posterior rod strain (RS) to gain insight into the ACR technique and the necessary surgical strategies to optimize longevity and stability. METHODS: An in vitro biomechanical study using standard flexibility testing (7.5 Nm) was performed on 14 human cadaveric specimens, separated into 2 groups similar in age, sex, bone mineral density, and intact ROM. For group 1 (n = 7, instrumented L1-S1), a 30° ACR was performed at L3-4. For group 2 (n = 7, instrumented T12-S1), a 30° L3 PSO was performed. Specimens were subjected to nondestructive loads in flexion, extension, axial rotation, lateral bending, and compression. Conditions tested were 1) intact, 2) pedicle screw with 2 rods (PSR), 3) ACR or PSO with 2 rods (+2R), and 4) ACR or PSO with 4 rods (+4R). Primary outcome measures of interest were ROM stability and posterior RS at L3-4. RESULTS: No difference was observed between groups in lumbar lordosis (p = 0.83) or focal angular lordosis at L3-4 (p = 0.75). No differences in stability were observed between ACR+2R and PSO+2R (p ≥ 0.06);​ however, ACR+2R was significantly less stable than PSR in flexion and extension (p ≤ 0.02), whereas PSO+2R was less stable than PSR only in extension (p = 0.04). ACR+4R was more stable than ACR+2R in flexion, extension, left axial rotation, and compression (p ≤ 0.02). PSO+4R was more stable than PSO+2R only in extension (p = 0.04). Both ACR+2R and PSO+2R resulted in significant increases in RS in flexion and extension compared with PSR (p ≤ 0.032). RS in flexion and extension decreased significantly for ACR+4R versus ACR+2R and for PSO+4R versus PSO+2R (p ≤ 0.047). PSO+2R yielded lower RS than ACR+2R in compression (p = 0.03). No differences existed in RS between ACR+4R and PSO+4R (p ≥ 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Although ACR appeared to be slightly more destabilizing than PSO using traditional 2R fixation, both techniques resulted in significant increases in posterior RS. The 4R technique increased stability in ACR and decreased RS in both ACR and PSO but may be more beneficial in ACR. Longer-term clinical studies are needed to appropriately identify the durability of the ACR technique in deformity correction.

Biomechanical effects of a novel posteriorly placed sacroiliac joint fusion device integrated with traditional lumbopelvic long-construct instrumentation.

OBJECTIVE: S2-alar-iliac (S2AI) screw fixation effectively ensures stability and enhances fusion in long-segment constructs. Nevertheless, pelvic fixation is associated with a high rate of mechanical failure. Because of the transarticular nature of the S2AI screw, adding a second point of fixation may provide additional stability and attenuate strains. The objective of the study was to evaluate changes in stability and strain with the integration of a sacroiliac (SI) joint fusion device, implanted through a novel posterior SI approach, supplemental to posterior long-segment fusion. METHODS: L1-pelvis human cadaveric specimens underwent pure moment (7.5 Nm) and compression (400 N) tests in the following conditions: 1) intact, 2) L2-S1 pedicle screw and rod fixation with L5-S1 interbody fusion, 3) added S2AI screws, and 4) added bilateral SI joint fixation (SIJF). The range of motion (ROM), rod strain, and screw bending moments (S1 and S2AI) were analyzed. RESULTS: S2AI fixation decreased L2-S1 ROM in flexion-extension (p ≤ 0.04), L5-S1 ROM in flexion-extension and compression (p ≤ 0.004), and SI joint ROM during flexion-extension and lateral bending (p ≤ 0.03) compared with S1 fixation. SI joint ROM was significantly less with SIJF in place than with the intact joint, S1, and S2AI fixation in flexion-extension and lateral bending (p ≤ 0.01). The S1 screw bending moment decreased following S2AI fixation by as much as 78% in extension, but with statistical significance only in right axial rotation (p = 0.03). Extending fixation to S2AI significantly increased the rod strain at L5-S1 during flexion, axial rotation, and compression (p ≤ 0.048). SIJF was associated with a slight increase in rod strain versus S2AI fixation alone at L5-S1 during left lateral bending (p = 0.048). Compared with the S1 condition, fixation to S2AI increased the mean rod strain at L5-S1 during compression (p = 0.048). The rod strain at L5-S1 was not statistically different with SIJF compared with S2AI fixation (p ≥ 0.12). CONCLUSIONS: Constructs ending with an S2AI screw versus an S1 screw tended to be more stable, with reduced SI joint motion. S2AI fixation decreased the S1 screw bending moments compared with fixation ending at S1. These benefits were paired with increased rod strain at L5-S1. Supplementation of S2AI fixation with SIJF implants provided further reductions (approximately 30%) in the sagittal plane and lateral bending SI joint motion compared with fixation ending at the S2AI position. This stability was not paired with significant changes in rod or screw strains.

Adjacent-segment effects of lumbar cortical screw-rod fixation versus pedicle screw-rod fixation with and without interbody support.

OBJECTIVE: Cortical screw-rod (CSR) fixation has emerged as an alternative to the traditional pedicle screw-rod (PSR) fixation for posterior lumbar fixation. Previous studies have concluded that CSR provides the same stability in cadaveric specimens as PSR and is comparable in clinical outcomes. However, recent clinical studies reported a lower incidence of radiographic and symptomatic adjacent-segment degeneration with CSR. No biomechanical study to date has focused on how the adjacent-segment mobility of these two constructs compares. This study aimed to investigate adjacent-segment mobility of CSR and PSR fixation, with and without interbody support (lateral lumbar interbody fusion [LLIF] or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion [TLIF]). METHODS: A retroactive analysis was done using normalized range of motion (ROM) data at levels adjacent to single-level (L3-4) bilateral screw-rod fixation using pedicle or cortical screws, with and without LLIF or TLIF. Intact and instrumented specimens (n = 28, all L2-5) were tested using pure moment loads (7.5 Nm) in flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation. Adjacent-segment ROM data were normalized to intact ROM data. Statistical comparisons of adjacent-segment normalized ROM between two of the groups (PSR followed by PSR+TLIF [n = 7] and CSR followed by CSR+TLIF [n = 7]) were performed using 2-way ANOVA with replication. Statistical comparisons among four of the groups (PSR+TLIF [n = 7], PSR+LLIF [n = 7], CSR+TLIF [n = 7], and CSR+LLIF [n = 7]) were made using 2-way ANOVA without replication. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. RESULTS: Proximal adjacent-segment normalized ROM was significantly larger with PSR than CSR during flexion-extension regardless of TLIF (p = 0.02), or with either TLIF or LLIF (p = 0.04). During lateral bending with TLIF, the distal adjacent-segment normalized ROM was significantly larger with PSR than CSR (p < 0.001). Moreover, regardless of the types of screw-rod fixations (CSR or PSR), TLIF had a significantly larger normalized ROM than LLIF in all directions at both proximal and distal adjacent segments (p ≤ 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: The use of PSR versus CSR during single-level lumbar fusion can significantly affect mobility at the adjacent segment, regardless of the presence of TLIF or with either TLIF or LLIF. Moreover, the type of interbody support also had a significant effect on adjacent-segment mobility.

Biomechanics of Circumferential Cervical Fixation Using Posterior Facet Cages: A Cadaveric Study.

OBJECTIVE: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is a common procedure for the treatment of cervical disease. Circumferential procedures are options for multilevel pathology. Potential complications of multilevel anterior procedures are dysphagia and pseudarthrosis, whereas potential complications of posterior surgery include development of cervical kyphosis and postoperative chronic neck pain. The addition of posterior cervical cages (PCCs) to multilevel ACDF is a minimally invasive option to perform circumferential fusion. This study evaluated the biomechanical performance of 3-level circumferential fusion with PCCs as supplemental fixation to anteriorly placed allografts, with and without anterior plate fixation. METHODS: Nondestructive flexibility tests (1.5 Nm) performed on 6 cervical C2-7 cadaveric specimens intact and after discectomy (C3-6) in 3 instrumented conditions: allograft with anterior plate (G+P), PCC with allograft and plate (PCC+G+P), and PCC with allograft alone (PCC+G). Range of motion (ROM) data were analyzed using 1-way repeated-measures analysis of variance. RESULTS: All instrumented conditions resulted in significantly reduced ROM at the 3 instrumented levels (C3-6) compared to intact spinal segments in flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation (p < 0.001). No significant difference in ROM was found between G+P and PCC+G+P conditions or between G+P and PCC+G conditions, indicating similar stability between these conditions in all directions of motion. CONCLUSION: All instrumented conditions resulted in considerable reduction in ROM. The added reduction in ROM through the addition of PCCs did not reach statistical significance. Circumferential fusion with anterior allograft, without plate and with PCCs, has comparable stability to ACDF with allograft and plate.

Impact of dual-headed pedicle screws on the biomechanics of lumbosacral junction multirod constructs.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate a novel connector design and compare it with traditional side connectors, such as a fixed-angle connector (FAC) and a variable-angle connector (VAC), with respect to lumbosacral stability and instrumentation strain. METHODS: Standard nondestructive flexibility tests (7.5 Nm) and compression tests (400 N) were performed using 7 human cadaveric specimens (L1-ilium) to compare range of motion (ROM) stability, posterior rod strain (RS), and sacral screw bending moment (SM). Directions of motion included flexion, extension, left and right lateral bending, left and right axial rotation, and compression. Conditions included 1) the standard 2-rod construct (2R); 2) the dual-tulip head (DTH) with 4-rod construct (4R); 3) FACs with 4R; and 4) VACs with 4R. Data were analyzed using repeated-measures ANOVA. RESULTS: Overall, there were no statistically significant differences in ROM across the lumbosacral junction among conditions (p > 0.07). Compared with 2R, DTH and FAC significantly reduced RS in extension, left axial rotation, and compression (p ≤ 0.03). VAC significantly decreased RS compared with 2R in flexion, extension, left axial rotation, right axial rotation, and compression (p ≤ 0.03), and significantly decreased RS compared with DTH in extension (p = 0.02). DTH was associated with increased SM in left and right axial rotation compared with 2R (p ≤ 0.003) and in left and right lateral bending and left and right axial rotation compared with FAC and VAC (p ≤ 0.02). FAC and VAC were associated with decreased SM compared with 2R in right and left lateral bending (p ≤ 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: RS across the lumbosacral junction can be high. Supplemental rod fixation with DTH is an effective strategy for reducing RS across the lumbosacral junction. However, the greatest reduction in RS and SM was achieved with a VAC that allowed for straight (uncontoured) accessory rod placement.

Dimensional Characterization of the Human Lumbar Interlaminar Space as a Guide for Safe Application of Minimally Invasive Dilators.

BACKGROUND: The risk of interlaminar passage of a dilator into the lumbar spinal canal in minimally invasive approaches is currently unknown. Among anthropometric data reported in the medical literature, there is no cadaveric report of the interlaminar dimensions of the lumbar spine. OBJECTIVE: To report the lumbar interlaminar dimensions in neutral, flexion, and extension postures. METHODS: A total of 8 spines were sectioned into lumbar segments. Digitized coordinate data defining the locations and movements of chosen anatomic points on the laminar edges at a given spinal level were used to measure changes in the opening dimensions during static neutral posture and flexion-extension movements. Interlaminar dimensions were averaged and categorized for each vertebral level and spinal posture. RESULTS: The mean interlaminar distance increased from neutral posture to flexion across all vertebral levels. The mean interlaminar distances in the neutral posture ranged from 12.21 mm (L5-S1) to 14.88 mm (L1-L2). In flexion, the range was from 17.15 mm (L5-S1) to 18.50 mm (L4-L5). These measurements are greater than the first several diameters of dilators in all minimally invasive dilator sets. CONCLUSION: The precise measurements of the lumbar interlaminar space are valuable to minimally invasive spine surgeons for the dilatation phase of the operation. The risk of interlaminar passage of a minimally invasive dilator is greatest in flexion with dilators that have a diameter of 16 mm or less. There is considerably less risk of interlaminar passage in patients positioned on an extended Jackson table.