Biomechanical study of space frame structure based on bone cement screw

Xiu,Jintao; Bu,Tao; Yan,Yabo; Wu,Zixiang; Yin,Zhanhai; Lei,Wei

doi:10.3892/etm.2020.8659

Biomechanical study of space frame structure based on bone cement screw

Authors:
- Jintao Xiu
- Tao Bu
- Yabo Yan
- Zixiang Wu
- Zhanhai Yin
- Wei Lei
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Department of Orthopaedics, Xijing Hospital, Air Force Medical University, Xi'an, Shaanxi 710032, P.R. China, Medical Department, Lintong Rehabilitation Center, Xi'an, Shaanxi 710600, P.R. China, Department of Orthopaedics, The First Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, Shaanxi 710061, P.R. China
Published online on: April 9, 2020 https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2020.8659
Pages: 3650-3656
Copyright: © Xiu et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License.

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

Stability of space frame structures with bone cement screw reinforcement by biomechanical testing was analyzed. Seven complete human spine specimens with osteoporosis were selected. Three specimens were separated into 18 vertebral bodies. Nine vertebral bodies were randomly selected and bone cement screws were implanted on both sides. Bone cement was used to form a bridge at the front end of the two screws (single vertebral group A). The other nine vertebral bodies were implanted with cement screws on both sides, but the front ends of the two screws were not bridged (single vertebral group B). The remaining spine specimens were used for biomechanical testing of the overall stability of the three‑dimensional frame. The four specimens were osteotomized, and then two specimens were randomly selected. Bone cement screws were implanted on both sides of the vertebral body, and a bone cement bridge was formed at the front end of the two screws to establish a three‑dimensional frame structure (multi‑vertebral group A). The other two spine specimens were implanted with cement screws on both sides of the vertebral body, but the front ends of the two screws were not bridged (multi‑vertebral group B). A statistical difference was found between the extractive force of bridged and non‑bridged specimens. Group B showed some loosening of screws after the test. The stability of the triangle structure screw, which was formed after the bridge was established at the front end of the single‑vertebral bone cement screw, was significantly enhanced. Moreover, the stability was significantly improved after the three‑dimensional frame structure was established in the multi‑vertebral body group, providing a new method for clinical improvement of the stability and reliability of internal fixation in patients with severe osteoporosis and spinal disease.

View Figures

View References

1	Bernhardt M, Swartz DE, Clothiaux PL, Crowell RR and White AA III: Posterolateral lumbar and lumbosacral fusion with and without pedicle screw internal fixation. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 284:109–115. 1992.PubMed/NCBI
2	Wray S, Mimran R, Vadapalli S, Shetye SS, McGilvray KC and Puttlitz CM: Pedicle screw placement in the lumbar spine: Effect of trajectory and screw design on acute biomechanical purchase. J Neurosurg Spine. 22:503–510. 2015.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
3	La Maida GA, Luceri F, Gallozzi F, Ferraro M and Bernardo M: Complication rate in adult deformity surgical treatment: Safety of the posterior osteotomies. Eur Spine J. 24 (Suppl 7):879–886. 2015.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
4	Galbusera F, Volkheimer D, Reitmaier S, Berger-Roscher N, Kienle A and Wilke HJ: Pedicle screw loosening: A clinically relevant complication? Eur Spine J. 24:1005–1016. 2015.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
5	Law M, Tencer AF and Anderson PA: Caudo-cephalad loading of pedicle screws: Mechanisms of loosening and methods of augmentation. Spine. 18:2438–2443. 1993.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
6	Chao KH, Lai YS, Chen WC, Chang CM, McClean CJ, Fan CY, Chang CH, Lin LC and Cheng CK: Biomechanical analysis of different types of pedicle screw augmentation: A cadaveric and synthetic bone sample study of instrumented vertebral specimens. Med Eng Phys. 35:1506–1512. 2013.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
7	Higashino K, Kim JH, Horton WC and Hutton WC: A biomechanical study of two different pedicle screw methods for fixation in osteoporotic and nonosteoporotic vertebrae. J Surg Orthop Adv. 21:198–203. 2012.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
8	Hamasaki T, Tanaka N, Kim J, Okada M, Ochi M and Hutton WC: Pedicle screw augmentation with polyethylene tape: A biomechanical study in the osteoporotic thoracolumbar spine. J Spinal Disord Tech. 23:127–132. 2010.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
9	Tsai KJ, Murakami H, Horton WC, Fei Q and Hutton WC: Pedicle screw fixation strength: A biomechanical comparison between 4.5-mm and 5.5-mm diameter screws in osteoporotic upper thoracic vertebrae. J Surg Orthop Adv. 18:23–27. 2009.PubMed/NCBI
10	Becker S, Chavanne A, Spitaler R, Kropik K, Aigner N, Ogon M and Redl H: Assessment of different screw augmentation techniques and screw designs in osteoporotic spines. Eur Spine J. 17:1462–1469. 2008.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
11	Lei W and Wu Z: Biomechanical evaluation of an expansive pedicle screw in calf vertebrae. Eur Spine J. 15:321–326. 2006.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
12	Liu D, Wu ZX, Gao MX, Wan SY, Shi L, Fu SC, Wang J and Lei W: A new method of partial screw augmentation in sheep vertebrae in vitro: Biomechanical and interfacial evaluation. J Spinal Disord Tech. 24:318–324. 2011.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
13	Wan SY, Lei W, Wu ZX, Lü R, Wang J, Li B, Fu SC and Zhan C: Micro-CT evaluation and histological analysis of screw-bone interface of expansile pedicle screw in osteoporotic sheep. Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi. 45:1271–1273. 2007.(In Chinese). PubMed/NCBI
14	Hao YX, Wu ZX and Yang Z: The clinical application of expandable pedicle screws in the short segment lumber fusion surgery in osteoporosis patients. Zhongguo Ji Zhu Ji Sui Za Zhi. 27:136–141. 2017.(In Chinese).
15	Liu D, Shi L, Lei W, Wei MQ, Qu B, Deng SL and Pan XM: Biomechanical comparison of expansive pedicle screw and polymethylmethacrylate-augmented pedicle screw in osteoporotic synthetic bone in primary implantation: An experimental study. Clin Spine Surg. 29:E351–E357. 2016.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
16	Kiner DW, Wybo CD, Sterba W, Yeni YN, Bartol SW and Vaidya R: Biomechanical analysis of different techniques in revision spinal instrumentation: Larger diameter screws versus cement augmentation. Spine. 33:2618–2622. 2008.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
17	Frankel BM, D'Agostino S and Wang C: A biomechanical cadaveric analysis of polymethylmethacrylate-augmented pedicle screw fixation. J Neurosurg Spine. 7:47–53. 2007.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
18	Moore DC, Maitra RS, Farjo LA, Graziano GP and Goldstein SA: Restoration of pedicle screw fixation with an in situ setting calcium phosphate cement. Spine. 22:1696–1705. 1997.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
19	Renner SM, Lim TH, Kim WJ, Katolik L, An HS and Andersson GB: Augmentation of pedicle screw fixation strength using an injectable calcium phosphate cement as a function of injection timing and method. Spine. 29:E212–E216. 2004.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
20	Chiang CK, Wang YH, Yang CY, Yang BD and Wang JL: Prophylactic vertebroplasty may reduce the risk of adjacent intact vertebra from fatigue injury: An ex vivo biomechanical study. Spine. 34:356–364. 2009.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
21	Kebaish KM, Martin CT, O'Brien JR, LaMotta IE, Voros GD and Belkoff SM: Use of vertebroplasty to prevent proximal junctional fractures in adult deformity surgery: A biomechanical cadaveric study. Spine J. 13:1897–1903. 2013.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
22	Tan JS, Singh S, Zhu QA, Dvorak MF, Fisher CG and Oxland TR: The effect of cement augmentation and extension of posterior instrumentation on stabilization and adjacent level effects in the elderly spine. Spine. 33:2728–2740. 2008.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
23	Xu G, Fu X, Du C, Ma J, Li Z and Ma X: Biomechanical effects of vertebroplasty on thoracolumbar burst fracture with transpedicular fixation: A finite element model analysis. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 100:379–383. 2014.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar