期刊文献+

TLIF术中最优化单侧螺钉植入和融合器放置的有限元分析 被引量:4

Finite element analysis on the optimal unilateral pedicle screwimplanted angle and cage position for TLIF surgery
原文传递
导出
摘要 目的比较经单侧腰椎间孔椎体间融合(transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion,TLIF)中不同轴向植入角度椎弓根螺钉和不同放置位置融合器的生物力学特性。方法建立正常L3~5有限元模型,在验证其有效性基础上,在L4~5节段模拟后路双侧TLIF和4种不同组合类型椎弓根螺钉植入和融合器放置的单侧TLIF有限元重构模型,即:小角度植入椎弓根螺钉+对侧放置融合器(模型A)、小角度植入椎弓根螺钉+同侧放置融合器(模型B)、大角度植入椎弓根螺钉+同侧放置融合器(模型C)、大角度植入椎弓根螺钉+对侧放置融合器(模型D),分别比较4种重构模型在各种生理应力下的活动范围(range of the motion,ROM)以及螺钉、融合器与L4下终板界面的最大Von Mises应力差异。结果 4种单侧TLIF重构模型在融合节段(L4~5)ROM均较正常模型显著下降,但仍高于双侧TLIF重构模型。4种单侧TLIF重构模型稳定性比较,模型C下降最多,其在屈伸、侧屈和扭转应力下ROM分别减少约为正常模型的50.7%、89.9%和90.3%。螺钉和融合器与L4下终板界面最大Von Mises应力比较,相对于其他3组模型,模型C除了在同侧侧屈和扭转外的大部分应力下承受较小的应力。结论在单侧TLIF重构模型中选择大角度植入椎弓根螺钉和同侧放置融合器能够获得最佳的生物力学稳定性,通过缩小与双侧TLIF模型稳定性差异以减少断钉或融合器下沉的风险,值得临床推广运用。 Objective To compare biomechanical properties of pedicle screw with different axial angles and inter- body cage with different positions for unilateral transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) surgery. Methods The normal L3-5 finite element (FE) model was established and validated. Then one bilateral TILF reconstruction FE model and four unilateral TILF reconstruction FE models with different pedicle screw-cage combination types at 14-5 level were constructed, respectively. Namely, Model A (a small axial angle-implanted screw and an ipsi- laterally-placed cage), Model B (a small axial angle-implanted screw and a contralaterally-placed cage), Model C (a large axial angle-implanted screw and an ipsilaterally-placed cage), Model D (a large axial angle-implanted screw and a contralaterally-placed cage). The range of motion (ROM) of 4 reconstruction models under variousphysiological stresses as well as the maximum Yon Mises stresses on pedicle screw, cage-L4 inferior endplate were compared. Results The ROMs at fusion segment (L4-5) in 4 unilateral TLIF reconstruction models were significantly decreased compared with the normal model, but they were still larger than bilateral TLIF reconstruc- tion model. For 4 unilateral TLIF reconstruction models, Model C showed the largest decrease in stability, and the ROM of Model C was 50. ?%, 89.9%, 90.3% of the normal model in flexion-extension, lateral bending, axial rotation, respectively. When comparing the maximum Von Mises stress of posterior pedicle screw and cage-L4 inferior endplate in 4 unilateral TLIF reconstruction models, Model C could bear relatively smaller stress under most loading modes, except in ipsilateral lateral bending and axial rotation. Conclusions The unilateral TLIF re- construction model with a large axial angle-implanted screw and an ipsilaterally placed-cage can achieve the opti- mal stability. By narrowing the difference in stability with the bilateral TILF model, the unilateral TLIF reconstruc- tion model can reduce the risk of screw failure and cage subsidence, which is worth of clinical application.
出处 《医用生物力学》 EI CAS CSCD 北大核心 2017年第5期415-421,共7页 Journal of Medical Biomechanics
基金 浙江省自然科学基金项目(LY13H060011)
关键词 经腰椎间孔椎体间融合 椎弓根螺钉 椎间融合器 有限元分析 Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) Pedicle screw Interbody cage Finiteelement analysis
  • 相关文献

参考文献3

二级参考文献59

  • 1张烽,陈兵乾,居建文,王素春,段广超,王以进.三种单纯腰椎椎间融合术加用双侧椎弓根螺钉内固定后生物力学比较的实验研究[J].医用生物力学,2007,22(3):302-305. 被引量:10
  • 2Martin CR, Gruszczynski AT, Braunsfurth HA, et al. The surgical management of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a systematic review. Spine( Phila Pa 1976) ,2007,32 : 1791-1798.
  • 3Kotani Y, Cunningham BW, Cappuccino A, et al. The effects of spinal fixation and destabilization on the biomechanical and histologic properties of spinal ligaments. A in vivo study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976),1998, 23: 672-683.
  • 4Shah RR, Mohammed S, Saifuddin A, et al. Radiologic evaluation of adjacent superior segment facet joint violation following transpedicular instrumentation of the lumbar spine. Spine ( Phila Pa 1976) ,2003, 28 : 272-275.
  • 5Kabins MB, Weinstein JN, Spratt KF, et al. Isolated IA-L5 fusions using the variable screw placement system: unilateral versus bilateral. J Spinal Disord,1992, 5 : 39-49.
  • 6Suk KS, Lee HM, Kim NH, et al. Unilateral versus bilateral pedicle screw fixation in lumbar spinal fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) ,2000, 25 : 1843-1847.
  • 7Fern6ndez-Fairen M, Sala P, Ramlrez H, et al. A prospective randomized study of unilateral versus bilateral instrumented posterolateral lumbar fusion in degenerative spondylolisthesis. Spine ( Phila Pa 1976 ) ,2007, 32 : 395 401.
  • 8Mori E, Okada S, Ueta T, et al. Spinous process-splitting open pedicle screw fusion provides favorable results in patients with low back discomfort and pain compared to conventional open pedicle screw fixation over 1 year after surgery. Eur Spine J, 2012,21.. 745-753.
  • 9Lee CS, Hwang CJ, Lee SW, et al. Risk factors for adjacent segment disease after lumbar fusion. Eur Spine J, 2009, 18: 1637-1643.
  • 10Shono Y, Kaneda K, Abumi K, et al. Stability of posterior spinal instrumentation and its effects on adjacent motion segments in the lumbosacral spine. Spine( Phila Pa 1976), 1998, 23 : 1550-1558.

共引文献54

同被引文献32

引证文献4

二级引证文献11

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部