Wei Fan, Song Yang, Jie Chen, Li-Xin Guo, Ming Zhang
{"title":"两种不同顶离装置的生物力学比较及其对腰骶部融合手术后骶髂关节的影响","authors":"Wei Fan, Song Yang, Jie Chen, Li-Xin Guo, Ming Zhang","doi":"10.14245/ns.2347108.554","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Interspinous spacer (ISS)-based and pedicle screw-rod dynamic fixator (PDF)-based topping-off devices have been applied in lumbar/lumbosacral fusion surgeries for preventing the development of proximal adjacent segment degeneration. However, little attention has been paid to sacroiliac joint (SIJ), which belongs to the adjacent joints. Accordingly, the objective of this study was to compare how these 2 topping-off devices affect the SIJ biomechanics.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A validated, normal finite-element lumbopelvic model (L3-pelvis) was initially adjusted to simulate interbody fusion with rigid fixation at the L5-S1 level, and then the DIAM or BioFlex system was instrumented at the L4-5 level to establish the ISS-based or PDF-based topping-off model, respectively. All the developed models were loaded with moments of 4 physiological motions using hybrid loading protocol.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Compared with the rigid fusion model (without topping-off devices), range of motion and von-Mises stress at the SIJs were increased by 23.1%-64.1% and 23.6%-62.8%, respectively, for the ISS-based model and by 51.2%-126.7% and 50.4%-108.7%, respectively, for the PDF-based model.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The obtained results suggest that the PDF-based topping-off device leads to higher increments in SIJ motion and stress than ISS-based topping-off device following lumbosacral fusion, implying topping-off technique could be linked to an increased risk of SIJ degeneration, especially when using PDF-based device.</p>","PeriodicalId":19269,"journal":{"name":"Neurospine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10992661/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Biomechanical Comparison of 2 Different Topping-off Devices and Their Influence on the Sacroiliac Joint Following Lumbosacral Fusion Surgery.\",\"authors\":\"Wei Fan, Song Yang, Jie Chen, Li-Xin Guo, Ming Zhang\",\"doi\":\"10.14245/ns.2347108.554\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Interspinous spacer (ISS)-based and pedicle screw-rod dynamic fixator (PDF)-based topping-off devices have been applied in lumbar/lumbosacral fusion surgeries for preventing the development of proximal adjacent segment degeneration. However, little attention has been paid to sacroiliac joint (SIJ), which belongs to the adjacent joints. Accordingly, the objective of this study was to compare how these 2 topping-off devices affect the SIJ biomechanics.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A validated, normal finite-element lumbopelvic model (L3-pelvis) was initially adjusted to simulate interbody fusion with rigid fixation at the L5-S1 level, and then the DIAM or BioFlex system was instrumented at the L4-5 level to establish the ISS-based or PDF-based topping-off model, respectively. All the developed models were loaded with moments of 4 physiological motions using hybrid loading protocol.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Compared with the rigid fusion model (without topping-off devices), range of motion and von-Mises stress at the SIJs were increased by 23.1%-64.1% and 23.6%-62.8%, respectively, for the ISS-based model and by 51.2%-126.7% and 50.4%-108.7%, respectively, for the PDF-based model.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The obtained results suggest that the PDF-based topping-off device leads to higher increments in SIJ motion and stress than ISS-based topping-off device following lumbosacral fusion, implying topping-off technique could be linked to an increased risk of SIJ degeneration, especially when using PDF-based device.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19269,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neurospine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10992661/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neurospine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14245/ns.2347108.554\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/31 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurospine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14245/ns.2347108.554","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:基于棘间垫片(ISS)和椎弓根螺钉-杆动态固定器(PDF)的顶离装置已被应用于腰椎/腰骶椎融合手术,以防止近端邻近节段发生退变。然而,人们很少关注属于邻近关节的骶髂关节(SIJ)。因此,本研究的目的是比较这两种顶推装置对骶髂关节生物力学的影响:方法:首先调整经过验证的正常有限元腰椎模型(L3-骨盆),模拟 L5-S1 水平刚性固定的椎间融合,然后在 L4-L5 水平植入 DIAM 或 BioFlex 系统,分别建立基于 ISS 或基于 PDF 的顶离模型。所有建立的模型均采用混合加载方案,加载了四种生理运动的力矩:结果:与刚性融合模型(无顶离装置)相比,基于 ISS 的模型的运动范围和 SIJ 的 von-Mises 应力分别增加了 23.1-64.1% 和 23.6-62.8%,基于 PDF 的模型的运动范围和 SIJ 的 von-Mises 应力分别增加了 51.2-126.7% 和 50.4-108.7%:结论:研究结果表明,与基于ISS的顶推装置相比,基于PDF的顶推装置会导致腰骶融合术后SIJ运动和应力的增加,这意味着顶推技术可能与SIJ退变风险的增加有关,尤其是在使用基于PDF的顶推装置时。
A Biomechanical Comparison of 2 Different Topping-off Devices and Their Influence on the Sacroiliac Joint Following Lumbosacral Fusion Surgery.
Objective: Interspinous spacer (ISS)-based and pedicle screw-rod dynamic fixator (PDF)-based topping-off devices have been applied in lumbar/lumbosacral fusion surgeries for preventing the development of proximal adjacent segment degeneration. However, little attention has been paid to sacroiliac joint (SIJ), which belongs to the adjacent joints. Accordingly, the objective of this study was to compare how these 2 topping-off devices affect the SIJ biomechanics.
Methods: A validated, normal finite-element lumbopelvic model (L3-pelvis) was initially adjusted to simulate interbody fusion with rigid fixation at the L5-S1 level, and then the DIAM or BioFlex system was instrumented at the L4-5 level to establish the ISS-based or PDF-based topping-off model, respectively. All the developed models were loaded with moments of 4 physiological motions using hybrid loading protocol.
Results: Compared with the rigid fusion model (without topping-off devices), range of motion and von-Mises stress at the SIJs were increased by 23.1%-64.1% and 23.6%-62.8%, respectively, for the ISS-based model and by 51.2%-126.7% and 50.4%-108.7%, respectively, for the PDF-based model.
Conclusion: The obtained results suggest that the PDF-based topping-off device leads to higher increments in SIJ motion and stress than ISS-based topping-off device following lumbosacral fusion, implying topping-off technique could be linked to an increased risk of SIJ degeneration, especially when using PDF-based device.