通过椎体后凸成形术重建椎体的单室和双室装置的生物力学比较

IF 3.8 3区 医学 Q2 ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL
Oliver Riesenbeck, Niklas Czarnowski, Michael Johannes Raschke, Simon Oeckenpöhler, René Hartensuer
{"title":"通过椎体后凸成形术重建椎体的单室和双室装置的生物力学比较","authors":"Oliver Riesenbeck, Niklas Czarnowski, Michael Johannes Raschke, Simon Oeckenpöhler, René Hartensuer","doi":"10.3390/bioengineering11080795","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This biomechanical in vitro study compared two kyphoplasty devices for the extent of height reconstruction, load-bearing capacity, cement volume, and adjacent fracture under cyclic loading.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Multisegmental (T11-L3) specimens were mounted into a testing machine and subjected to compression, creating an incomplete burst fracture of L1. Kyphoplasty was performed using a one- or two-compartment device. Then, the testing machine was used for a cyclic loading test of load-bearing capacity to compare the two groups for the amount of applied load until failure and subsequent adjacent fracture.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Vertebral body height reconstruction was effective for both groups but not statistically significantly different. After cyclic loading, refracture of vertebrae that had undergone kyphoplasty was not observed in any specimen, but fractures were observed in adjacent vertebrae. The differences between the numbers of cycles and of loads were not statistically significant. An increase in cement volume was strongly correlated with increased risks of adjacent fractures.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The two-compartment device was not substantially superior to the one-compartment device. The use of higher cement volume correlated with the occurrence of adjacent fractures.</p>","PeriodicalId":8874,"journal":{"name":"Bioengineering","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11352009/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Biomechanical Comparisons between One- and Two-Compartment Devices for Reconstructing Vertebrae by Kyphoplasty.\",\"authors\":\"Oliver Riesenbeck, Niklas Czarnowski, Michael Johannes Raschke, Simon Oeckenpöhler, René Hartensuer\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/bioengineering11080795\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This biomechanical in vitro study compared two kyphoplasty devices for the extent of height reconstruction, load-bearing capacity, cement volume, and adjacent fracture under cyclic loading.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Multisegmental (T11-L3) specimens were mounted into a testing machine and subjected to compression, creating an incomplete burst fracture of L1. Kyphoplasty was performed using a one- or two-compartment device. Then, the testing machine was used for a cyclic loading test of load-bearing capacity to compare the two groups for the amount of applied load until failure and subsequent adjacent fracture.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Vertebral body height reconstruction was effective for both groups but not statistically significantly different. After cyclic loading, refracture of vertebrae that had undergone kyphoplasty was not observed in any specimen, but fractures were observed in adjacent vertebrae. The differences between the numbers of cycles and of loads were not statistically significant. An increase in cement volume was strongly correlated with increased risks of adjacent fractures.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The two-compartment device was not substantially superior to the one-compartment device. The use of higher cement volume correlated with the occurrence of adjacent fractures.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8874,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bioengineering\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11352009/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bioengineering\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering11080795\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bioengineering","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering11080795","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:这项生物力学体外研究比较了两种椎体后凸成形术装置在循环负荷下的高度重建程度、承重能力、骨水泥量和邻近骨折情况:方法:将多节(T11-L3)试样安装到试验机中,对其进行压缩,造成 L1 的不完全爆裂性骨折。使用单腔或双腔装置进行椎体后凸成形术。然后,使用试验机进行承重能力循环加载试验,比较两组在加载负荷量直至失效和随后邻近骨折的情况:结果:两组患者的椎体高度重建均有效,但无明显统计学差异。在循环加载后,没有观察到任何标本中接受过椎体后凸成形术的椎体发生再骨折,但观察到邻近椎体发生骨折。循环次数和载荷之间的差异没有统计学意义。骨水泥量的增加与邻近骨折风险的增加密切相关:结论:双腔装置并没有明显优于单腔装置。结论:双腔装置并没有明显优于单腔装置,使用较高的骨水泥量与邻近骨折的发生率相关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Biomechanical Comparisons between One- and Two-Compartment Devices for Reconstructing Vertebrae by Kyphoplasty.

Background: This biomechanical in vitro study compared two kyphoplasty devices for the extent of height reconstruction, load-bearing capacity, cement volume, and adjacent fracture under cyclic loading.

Methods: Multisegmental (T11-L3) specimens were mounted into a testing machine and subjected to compression, creating an incomplete burst fracture of L1. Kyphoplasty was performed using a one- or two-compartment device. Then, the testing machine was used for a cyclic loading test of load-bearing capacity to compare the two groups for the amount of applied load until failure and subsequent adjacent fracture.

Results: Vertebral body height reconstruction was effective for both groups but not statistically significantly different. After cyclic loading, refracture of vertebrae that had undergone kyphoplasty was not observed in any specimen, but fractures were observed in adjacent vertebrae. The differences between the numbers of cycles and of loads were not statistically significant. An increase in cement volume was strongly correlated with increased risks of adjacent fractures.

Conclusion: The two-compartment device was not substantially superior to the one-compartment device. The use of higher cement volume correlated with the occurrence of adjacent fractures.

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
Bioengineering
Bioengineering Chemical Engineering-Bioengineering
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
8.70%
发文量
661
期刊介绍: Aims Bioengineering (ISSN 2306-5354) provides an advanced forum for the science and technology of bioengineering. It publishes original research papers, comprehensive reviews, communications and case reports. Our aim is to encourage scientists to publish their experimental and theoretical results in as much detail as possible. All aspects of bioengineering are welcomed from theoretical concepts to education and applications. There is no restriction on the length of the papers. The full experimental details must be provided so that the results can be reproduced. There are, in addition, four key features of this Journal: ● We are introducing a new concept in scientific and technical publications “The Translational Case Report in Bioengineering”. It is a descriptive explanatory analysis of a transformative or translational event. Understanding that the goal of bioengineering scholarship is to advance towards a transformative or clinical solution to an identified transformative/clinical need, the translational case report is used to explore causation in order to find underlying principles that may guide other similar transformative/translational undertakings. ● Manuscripts regarding research proposals and research ideas will be particularly welcomed. ● Electronic files and software regarding the full details of the calculation and experimental procedure, if unable to be published in a normal way, can be deposited as supplementary material. ● We also accept manuscripts communicating to a broader audience with regard to research projects financed with public funds. Scope ● Bionics and biological cybernetics: implantology; bio–abio interfaces ● Bioelectronics: wearable electronics; implantable electronics; “more than Moore” electronics; bioelectronics devices ● Bioprocess and biosystems engineering and applications: bioprocess design; biocatalysis; bioseparation and bioreactors; bioinformatics; bioenergy; etc. ● Biomolecular, cellular and tissue engineering and applications: tissue engineering; chromosome engineering; embryo engineering; cellular, molecular and synthetic biology; metabolic engineering; bio-nanotechnology; micro/nano technologies; genetic engineering; transgenic technology ● Biomedical engineering and applications: biomechatronics; biomedical electronics; biomechanics; biomaterials; biomimetics; biomedical diagnostics; biomedical therapy; biomedical devices; sensors and circuits; biomedical imaging and medical information systems; implants and regenerative medicine; neurotechnology; clinical engineering; rehabilitation engineering ● Biochemical engineering and applications: metabolic pathway engineering; modeling and simulation ● Translational bioengineering
×
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