Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
A Novel Spinal Implant for Fusionless Scoliosis Correction: A Biomechanical Analysis of the Motion Preserving Properties of a Posterior Periapical Concave Distraction Device.
Holewijn, Roderick M; de Kleuver, Marinus; van der Veen, Albert J; Emanuel, Kaj S; Bisschop, Arno; Stadhouder, Agnita; van Royen, Barend J; Kingma, Idsart.
Afiliação
  • Holewijn RM; Department of Orthopedic Surgery, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  • de Kleuver M; Department of Orthopedic Surgery, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  • van der Veen AJ; Department of Physics and Medical Technology, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  • Emanuel KS; Department of Orthopedic Surgery, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  • Bisschop A; Department of Orthopedic Surgery, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  • Stadhouder A; Department of Orthopedic Surgery, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  • van Royen BJ; Department of Orthopedic Surgery, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  • Kingma I; Department of Human Movement Sciences, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Global Spine J ; 7(5): 400-409, 2017 Aug.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28811983
ABSTRACT
STUDY

DESIGN:

Biomechanical study.

OBJECTIVE:

Recently, a posterior concave periapical distraction device for fusionless scoliosis correction was introduced. The goal of this study was to quantify the effect of the periapical distraction device on spinal range of motion (ROM) in comparison with traditional rigid pedicle screw-rod instrumentation.

METHODS:

Using a spinal motion simulator, 6 human spines were loaded with 4 N m and 6 porcine spines with 2 N m to induce flexion-extension (FE), lateral bending (LB), and axial rotation (AR). ROM was measured in 3 conditions untreated, periapical distraction device, and rigid pedicle screw-rod instrumentation.

RESULTS:

The periapical distraction device caused a significant (P < .05) decrease in ROM of FE (human, -40.0% and porcine, -55.9%) and LB (human, -18.2% and porcine, -17.9%) as compared to the untreated spine, while ROM of AR remained unaffected. In comparison, rigid instrumentation caused a significantly (P < .05) larger decrease in ROM of FE (human, -80.9% and porcine, -94.0%), LB (human, -75.0% and porcine, -92.2%), and AR (human, -71.3% and porcine, -86.9%).

CONCLUSIONS:

Although no destructive forces were applied, no device failures were observed. Spinal ROM was significantly less constrained by the periapical distraction device compared to rigid pedicle screw-rod instrumentation. Therefore, provided that scoliosis correction is achieved, a more physiological spinal motion is expected after scoliosis correction with the posterior concave periapical distraction device.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2017 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2017 Tipo de documento: Article