多层次颈椎后路器械模型生物力学参数的有限元分析比较:C7椎体的侧向质量螺钉固定与跨椎螺钉固定。

IF 2.3 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
A. Kulkarni, Priyambada Kumar, Gautam M. Shetty, Sandipan Roy, P. S. Manickam, Raja Dhason, A. R. S. S. Chadalavada, Y. Adbalwad
{"title":"多层次颈椎后路器械模型生物力学参数的有限元分析比较:C7椎体的侧向质量螺钉固定与跨椎螺钉固定。","authors":"A. Kulkarni, Priyambada Kumar, Gautam M. Shetty, Sandipan Roy, P. S. Manickam, Raja Dhason, A. R. S. S. Chadalavada, Y. Adbalwad","doi":"10.31616/asj.2023.0231","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Study Design\nBasic research.\n\n\nPurpose\nThis finite element (FE) analysis (FEA) aimed to compare the biomechanical parameters in multilevel posterior cervical fixation with the C7 vertebra instrumented by two techniques: lateral mass screw (LMS) vs. transpedicular screw (TPS).\n\n\nOverview of Literature\nVery few studies have compared the biomechanics of different multilevel posterior cervical fixation constructs.\n\n\nMethods\nFour FE models of multilevel posterior cervical fixation were created and tested by FEA in various permutations and combinations. Generic differences in fixation were determined, and the following parameters were assessed: (1) maximum moment at failure, (2) maximum angulation at failure, (3) maximum stress at failure, (4) point of failure, (5) intervertebral disc stress, and (6) influence of adding a C2 pars screw to the multilevel construct.\n\n\nResults\nThe maximum moment at failure was higher in the LMS fixation group than in the TPS group. The maximum angulation in flexion allowed by LMS was higher than that by TPS. The maximum strain at failure was higher in the LMS group than in the TPS group. The maximum stress endured before failure was higher in the TPS group than in the LMS group. Intervertebral stress levels at C6-C7 and C7-T1 intervertebral discs were higher in the LMS group than in the TPS group. For both models where C2 fixation was performed, lower von Mises stress was recorded at the C2-C3 intervertebral disc level.\n\n\nConclusions\nEnding a multilevel posterior cervical fixation construct with TPS fixation rather than LMS fixation at the C7 vertebra provides a stiff and more constrained construct system, with higher stress endurance to compressive force. The constraint and durability of the construct can be further enhanced by adding a C2 pars screw in the fixation system.","PeriodicalId":8555,"journal":{"name":"Asian Spine Journal","volume":"32 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Finite Element Analysis Comparing the Biomechanical Parameters in Multilevel Posterior Cervical Instrumentation Model Involving Lateral Mass Screw versus Transpedicular Screw Fixation at the C7 Vertebra.\",\"authors\":\"A. Kulkarni, Priyambada Kumar, Gautam M. Shetty, Sandipan Roy, P. S. Manickam, Raja Dhason, A. R. S. S. Chadalavada, Y. Adbalwad\",\"doi\":\"10.31616/asj.2023.0231\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Study Design\\nBasic research.\\n\\n\\nPurpose\\nThis finite element (FE) analysis (FEA) aimed to compare the biomechanical parameters in multilevel posterior cervical fixation with the C7 vertebra instrumented by two techniques: lateral mass screw (LMS) vs. transpedicular screw (TPS).\\n\\n\\nOverview of Literature\\nVery few studies have compared the biomechanics of different multilevel posterior cervical fixation constructs.\\n\\n\\nMethods\\nFour FE models of multilevel posterior cervical fixation were created and tested by FEA in various permutations and combinations. Generic differences in fixation were determined, and the following parameters were assessed: (1) maximum moment at failure, (2) maximum angulation at failure, (3) maximum stress at failure, (4) point of failure, (5) intervertebral disc stress, and (6) influence of adding a C2 pars screw to the multilevel construct.\\n\\n\\nResults\\nThe maximum moment at failure was higher in the LMS fixation group than in the TPS group. The maximum angulation in flexion allowed by LMS was higher than that by TPS. The maximum strain at failure was higher in the LMS group than in the TPS group. The maximum stress endured before failure was higher in the TPS group than in the LMS group. Intervertebral stress levels at C6-C7 and C7-T1 intervertebral discs were higher in the LMS group than in the TPS group. For both models where C2 fixation was performed, lower von Mises stress was recorded at the C2-C3 intervertebral disc level.\\n\\n\\nConclusions\\nEnding a multilevel posterior cervical fixation construct with TPS fixation rather than LMS fixation at the C7 vertebra provides a stiff and more constrained construct system, with higher stress endurance to compressive force. The constraint and durability of the construct can be further enhanced by adding a C2 pars screw in the fixation system.\",\"PeriodicalId\":8555,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asian Spine Journal\",\"volume\":\"32 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asian Spine Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31616/asj.2023.0231\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Spine Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31616/asj.2023.0231","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究设计基础研究。目的该有限元分析(FEA)旨在比较C7椎体多层次颈椎后路固定的生物力学参数。文献综述很少有研究对不同的多层次颈椎后路固定结构的生物力学进行比较。方法创建了四种多层次颈椎后路固定的有限元模型,并通过有限元分析以不同的排列和组合进行测试。确定了固定的一般差异,并评估了以下参数:(1) 失效时的最大力矩;(2) 失效时的最大角度;(3) 失效时的最大应力;(4) 失效点;(5) 椎间盘应力;(6) 在多级结构中添加 C2 旁螺钉的影响。LMS 固定组允许的最大屈曲角度高于 TPS 固定组。LMS 固定组的破坏时最大应变高于 TPS 固定组。TPS 组在失效前承受的最大应力高于 LMS 组。LMS 组 C6-C7 和 C7-T1 椎间盘的椎间应力水平高于 TPS 组。结论在C7椎体处采用TPS固定而非LMS固定结束多层次颈椎后路固定结构,可提供一个更坚硬、更受约束的结构系统,对压缩力具有更高的应力耐受性。通过在固定系统中添加 C2 椎旁螺钉,可进一步增强结构的约束性和耐久性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Finite Element Analysis Comparing the Biomechanical Parameters in Multilevel Posterior Cervical Instrumentation Model Involving Lateral Mass Screw versus Transpedicular Screw Fixation at the C7 Vertebra.
Study Design Basic research. Purpose This finite element (FE) analysis (FEA) aimed to compare the biomechanical parameters in multilevel posterior cervical fixation with the C7 vertebra instrumented by two techniques: lateral mass screw (LMS) vs. transpedicular screw (TPS). Overview of Literature Very few studies have compared the biomechanics of different multilevel posterior cervical fixation constructs. Methods Four FE models of multilevel posterior cervical fixation were created and tested by FEA in various permutations and combinations. Generic differences in fixation were determined, and the following parameters were assessed: (1) maximum moment at failure, (2) maximum angulation at failure, (3) maximum stress at failure, (4) point of failure, (5) intervertebral disc stress, and (6) influence of adding a C2 pars screw to the multilevel construct. Results The maximum moment at failure was higher in the LMS fixation group than in the TPS group. The maximum angulation in flexion allowed by LMS was higher than that by TPS. The maximum strain at failure was higher in the LMS group than in the TPS group. The maximum stress endured before failure was higher in the TPS group than in the LMS group. Intervertebral stress levels at C6-C7 and C7-T1 intervertebral discs were higher in the LMS group than in the TPS group. For both models where C2 fixation was performed, lower von Mises stress was recorded at the C2-C3 intervertebral disc level. Conclusions Ending a multilevel posterior cervical fixation construct with TPS fixation rather than LMS fixation at the C7 vertebra provides a stiff and more constrained construct system, with higher stress endurance to compressive force. The constraint and durability of the construct can be further enhanced by adding a C2 pars screw in the fixation system.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Asian Spine Journal
Asian Spine Journal ORTHOPEDICS-
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
4.30%
发文量
108
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信