Kingsley R Chin, Jason A Seale, Carl A Bruce, Warren D Yu, Steven C Anagnost, Vivek P Kushwaha, Roger D Sung, Josue Gabriel, Craig S Meyer, Neil R Crawford, Vito Lore
{"title":"双侧 FacetFuse® 转移椎弓根螺钉与双侧或单侧椎弓根螺钉连杆结构的尸体生物力学比较研究。","authors":"Kingsley R Chin, Jason A Seale, Carl A Bruce, Warren D Yu, Steven C Anagnost, Vivek P Kushwaha, Roger D Sung, Josue Gabriel, Craig S Meyer, Neil R Crawford, Vito Lore","doi":"10.21037/jss-24-10","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Achieving optimal immediate stability is crucial in lumbar fusion surgeries. Traditionally, four pedicle screws have been utilized to provide posterior stability at the L5-S1 level. However, the use of bilateral transfacet pedicle screws (TFPS) as an alternative construct has shown promising results in terms of biomechanical stability. This research paper investigates the biomechanical stability of TFPS with a lag design in comparison to equivalent-sized unilateral or bilateral fully threaded pedicle screw-rod (PSR) constructs at the L5-S1 disc level. The study assesses the immediate stability achieved by these constructs which have clinical implications in achieving lumbar segment fusion. We hypothesized that bilateral TFPS will yield immediate lumbar fixation that is comparable to unilateral or bilateral PSR constructs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Cadaveric biomechanical testing was conducted <i>in vitro</i> to evaluate the stability of posterior fixation using bilateral TFPS (FacetFuse<sup>®</sup>, LESSpine, Burlington, MA, USA), bilateral and unilateral PSR (PedFuse Return, LESSpine, Burlington, MA, USA) constructs measuring 5.0 mm × 40 mm. A comprehensive analysis of range of motion (ROM) and stability under various loading conditions was performed to a maximum of 7.5 Nm. The constructs were assessed for their ability to provide immediate stability at the L5-S1 disc level.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fourteen specimens were analyzed with an average age of 53.14±10.99 years and comparable bone mineral density. TFPS demonstrated a reduced ROM that was notably lower than that of unilateral PSR in all loading modes and was comparable to bilateral PSR, especially in extension and axial rotation (AR). The unilateral and bilateral PSR groups differed notably in lateral bending (LB) and AR.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Bilateral TFPS demonstrated superior immediate stability than unilateral PSR and was an equivalent substitute to bilateral PSR constructs at the L5-S1 disc level. Further clinical investigations are necessary to validate these results and ascertain the long-term outcomes and advantages associated with the use of bilateral TFPS as an alternative construct. Our findings showed that bilateral TFPS could potentially reduce the number of required pedicle screws while achieving comparable stability in lumbar fusion procedures.</p>","PeriodicalId":17131,"journal":{"name":"Journal of spine surgery","volume":"10 3","pages":"354-361"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11467287/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparative cadaveric biomechanical study of bilateral FacetFuse<sup>®</sup> transfacet pedicle screws versus bilateral or unilateral pedicle screw-rod construct.\",\"authors\":\"Kingsley R Chin, Jason A Seale, Carl A Bruce, Warren D Yu, Steven C Anagnost, Vivek P Kushwaha, Roger D Sung, Josue Gabriel, Craig S Meyer, Neil R Crawford, Vito Lore\",\"doi\":\"10.21037/jss-24-10\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Achieving optimal immediate stability is crucial in lumbar fusion surgeries. Traditionally, four pedicle screws have been utilized to provide posterior stability at the L5-S1 level. However, the use of bilateral transfacet pedicle screws (TFPS) as an alternative construct has shown promising results in terms of biomechanical stability. This research paper investigates the biomechanical stability of TFPS with a lag design in comparison to equivalent-sized unilateral or bilateral fully threaded pedicle screw-rod (PSR) constructs at the L5-S1 disc level. The study assesses the immediate stability achieved by these constructs which have clinical implications in achieving lumbar segment fusion. We hypothesized that bilateral TFPS will yield immediate lumbar fixation that is comparable to unilateral or bilateral PSR constructs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Cadaveric biomechanical testing was conducted <i>in vitro</i> to evaluate the stability of posterior fixation using bilateral TFPS (FacetFuse<sup>®</sup>, LESSpine, Burlington, MA, USA), bilateral and unilateral PSR (PedFuse Return, LESSpine, Burlington, MA, USA) constructs measuring 5.0 mm × 40 mm. A comprehensive analysis of range of motion (ROM) and stability under various loading conditions was performed to a maximum of 7.5 Nm. The constructs were assessed for their ability to provide immediate stability at the L5-S1 disc level.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fourteen specimens were analyzed with an average age of 53.14±10.99 years and comparable bone mineral density. TFPS demonstrated a reduced ROM that was notably lower than that of unilateral PSR in all loading modes and was comparable to bilateral PSR, especially in extension and axial rotation (AR). The unilateral and bilateral PSR groups differed notably in lateral bending (LB) and AR.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Bilateral TFPS demonstrated superior immediate stability than unilateral PSR and was an equivalent substitute to bilateral PSR constructs at the L5-S1 disc level. Further clinical investigations are necessary to validate these results and ascertain the long-term outcomes and advantages associated with the use of bilateral TFPS as an alternative construct. Our findings showed that bilateral TFPS could potentially reduce the number of required pedicle screws while achieving comparable stability in lumbar fusion procedures.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17131,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of spine surgery\",\"volume\":\"10 3\",\"pages\":\"354-361\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11467287/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of spine surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21037/jss-24-10\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/9/4 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of spine surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21037/jss-24-10","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:在腰椎融合手术中,实现最佳的即时稳定性至关重要。传统上,使用四根椎弓根螺钉来提供 L5-S1 水平的后方稳定性。然而,使用双侧椎弓根螺钉(TFPS)作为替代结构在生物力学稳定性方面显示出了良好的效果。本研究论文探讨了滞后设计的 TFPS 与同等大小的单侧或双侧全螺纹椎弓根螺钉-螺杆(PSR)结构在 L5-S1 椎间盘水平上的生物力学稳定性比较。该研究评估了这些结构所实现的即时稳定性,这对实现腰椎段融合具有临床意义。我们假设,双侧 TFPS 将产生与单侧或双侧 PSR 构架相当的即时腰椎固定效果:我们在体外进行了尸体生物力学测试,以评估使用双侧 TFPS(FacetFuse®,LESSpine,美国马萨诸塞州伯灵顿市)、双侧和单侧 PSR(PedFuse Return,LESSpine,美国马萨诸塞州伯灵顿市)构建的 5.0 mm × 40 mm 后固定的稳定性。对各种负荷条件下的运动范围(ROM)和稳定性进行了全面分析,最大负荷为 7.5 牛米。对这些结构在 L5-S1 椎间盘水平提供即时稳定性的能力进行了评估:对 14 个样本进行了分析,样本的平均年龄为 53.14±10.99 岁,骨质密度相当。在所有加载模式下,TFPS的ROM都明显低于单侧PSR,与双侧PSR相当,尤其是在伸展和轴向旋转(AR)方面。单侧和双侧 PSR 组在侧弯(LB)和 AR 方面差异明显:结论:双侧 TFPS 的即时稳定性优于单侧 PSR,在 L5-S1 椎间盘水平上可替代双侧 PSR 结构。有必要进行进一步的临床研究来验证这些结果,并确定使用双侧TFPS作为替代结构的长期效果和优势。我们的研究结果表明,在腰椎融合术中,双侧 TFPS 有可能减少所需的椎弓根螺钉数量,同时达到相当的稳定性。
A comparative cadaveric biomechanical study of bilateral FacetFuse® transfacet pedicle screws versus bilateral or unilateral pedicle screw-rod construct.
Background: Achieving optimal immediate stability is crucial in lumbar fusion surgeries. Traditionally, four pedicle screws have been utilized to provide posterior stability at the L5-S1 level. However, the use of bilateral transfacet pedicle screws (TFPS) as an alternative construct has shown promising results in terms of biomechanical stability. This research paper investigates the biomechanical stability of TFPS with a lag design in comparison to equivalent-sized unilateral or bilateral fully threaded pedicle screw-rod (PSR) constructs at the L5-S1 disc level. The study assesses the immediate stability achieved by these constructs which have clinical implications in achieving lumbar segment fusion. We hypothesized that bilateral TFPS will yield immediate lumbar fixation that is comparable to unilateral or bilateral PSR constructs.
Methods: Cadaveric biomechanical testing was conducted in vitro to evaluate the stability of posterior fixation using bilateral TFPS (FacetFuse®, LESSpine, Burlington, MA, USA), bilateral and unilateral PSR (PedFuse Return, LESSpine, Burlington, MA, USA) constructs measuring 5.0 mm × 40 mm. A comprehensive analysis of range of motion (ROM) and stability under various loading conditions was performed to a maximum of 7.5 Nm. The constructs were assessed for their ability to provide immediate stability at the L5-S1 disc level.
Results: Fourteen specimens were analyzed with an average age of 53.14±10.99 years and comparable bone mineral density. TFPS demonstrated a reduced ROM that was notably lower than that of unilateral PSR in all loading modes and was comparable to bilateral PSR, especially in extension and axial rotation (AR). The unilateral and bilateral PSR groups differed notably in lateral bending (LB) and AR.
Conclusions: Bilateral TFPS demonstrated superior immediate stability than unilateral PSR and was an equivalent substitute to bilateral PSR constructs at the L5-S1 disc level. Further clinical investigations are necessary to validate these results and ascertain the long-term outcomes and advantages associated with the use of bilateral TFPS as an alternative construct. Our findings showed that bilateral TFPS could potentially reduce the number of required pedicle screws while achieving comparable stability in lumbar fusion procedures.