Austen D Katz, Junho Song, Priya Duvvuri, Shaya Shahsavarani, Alex Ngan, Luke Zappia, David Nuckley, Valerie Coldren, Josh Rubin, David Essig, Jeff Silber, Sheeraz A Qureshi, Sohrab Virk
{"title":"骨密度与可膨胀椎间融合器植入后的下沉深度相关:生物力学分析","authors":"Austen D Katz, Junho Song, Priya Duvvuri, Shaya Shahsavarani, Alex Ngan, Luke Zappia, David Nuckley, Valerie Coldren, Josh Rubin, David Essig, Jeff Silber, Sheeraz A Qureshi, Sohrab Virk","doi":"10.1097/BSD.0000000000001727","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Biomechanical analysis.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the depth of subsidence resulting from an expandable interbody cage at varying bone foam densities.</p><p><strong>Summary of background data: </strong>Expandable interbody cages have been shown to be associated with increased rates of subsidence. It is critical to evaluate all variables which may influence a patient's risk of subsidence following the placement of an expandable interbody cage.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In the first stage of the study, subsidence depth was measured with 1 Nm of input expansion torque. In the second stage, the depth of subsidence was measured following 150 N output force exerted by an expandable interbody cage. Within each stage, different bone foam densities were analyzed, including 5, 10, 15, and 20 pounds per cubic foot (PCF). Five experimental trials were performed for each PCF material, and the mean subsidence depths were calculated. Trials which failed to reach 150 N output force were considered outliers and were excluded from the analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was an overall decrease in subsidence depth with increasing bone foam density. The mean subsidence depths at 150 N output force were 2.0±0.3 mm for 5 PCF, 1.8±0.2 mm for 10 PCF, 1.1±0.2 mm for 15 PCF, and 1.1±0.2 mm for 20 PCF bone foam. The mean subsidence depths at 1 Nm of input torque were 2.3±0.5 mm for 5 PCF, 2.3±0.5 mm for 10 PCF, 1.2±0.2 mm for 15 PCF, and 1.1±0.1 mm for 20 PCF bone foam.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Depth of subsidence was negatively correlated with bone foam density at both constant input torque and constant endplate force. Because tactile feedback of cage expansion into the subsiding bone cannot be reliably distinguished from true expansion of disc space height, surgeons should take bone quality into account when deploying expandable cages.</p>","PeriodicalId":10457,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Spine Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bone Density Correlates With Depth of Subsidence After Expandable Interbody Cage Placement: A Biomechanical Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Austen D Katz, Junho Song, Priya Duvvuri, Shaya Shahsavarani, Alex Ngan, Luke Zappia, David Nuckley, Valerie Coldren, Josh Rubin, David Essig, Jeff Silber, Sheeraz A Qureshi, Sohrab Virk\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/BSD.0000000000001727\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Biomechanical analysis.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the depth of subsidence resulting from an expandable interbody cage at varying bone foam densities.</p><p><strong>Summary of background data: </strong>Expandable interbody cages have been shown to be associated with increased rates of subsidence. It is critical to evaluate all variables which may influence a patient's risk of subsidence following the placement of an expandable interbody cage.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In the first stage of the study, subsidence depth was measured with 1 Nm of input expansion torque. In the second stage, the depth of subsidence was measured following 150 N output force exerted by an expandable interbody cage. Within each stage, different bone foam densities were analyzed, including 5, 10, 15, and 20 pounds per cubic foot (PCF). Five experimental trials were performed for each PCF material, and the mean subsidence depths were calculated. Trials which failed to reach 150 N output force were considered outliers and were excluded from the analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was an overall decrease in subsidence depth with increasing bone foam density. The mean subsidence depths at 150 N output force were 2.0±0.3 mm for 5 PCF, 1.8±0.2 mm for 10 PCF, 1.1±0.2 mm for 15 PCF, and 1.1±0.2 mm for 20 PCF bone foam. The mean subsidence depths at 1 Nm of input torque were 2.3±0.5 mm for 5 PCF, 2.3±0.5 mm for 10 PCF, 1.2±0.2 mm for 15 PCF, and 1.1±0.1 mm for 20 PCF bone foam.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Depth of subsidence was negatively correlated with bone foam density at both constant input torque and constant endplate force. Because tactile feedback of cage expansion into the subsiding bone cannot be reliably distinguished from true expansion of disc space height, surgeons should take bone quality into account when deploying expandable cages.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10457,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Spine Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Spine Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0000000000001727\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Spine Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0000000000001727","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Bone Density Correlates With Depth of Subsidence After Expandable Interbody Cage Placement: A Biomechanical Analysis.
Study design: Biomechanical analysis.
Objective: To evaluate the depth of subsidence resulting from an expandable interbody cage at varying bone foam densities.
Summary of background data: Expandable interbody cages have been shown to be associated with increased rates of subsidence. It is critical to evaluate all variables which may influence a patient's risk of subsidence following the placement of an expandable interbody cage.
Methods: In the first stage of the study, subsidence depth was measured with 1 Nm of input expansion torque. In the second stage, the depth of subsidence was measured following 150 N output force exerted by an expandable interbody cage. Within each stage, different bone foam densities were analyzed, including 5, 10, 15, and 20 pounds per cubic foot (PCF). Five experimental trials were performed for each PCF material, and the mean subsidence depths were calculated. Trials which failed to reach 150 N output force were considered outliers and were excluded from the analysis.
Results: There was an overall decrease in subsidence depth with increasing bone foam density. The mean subsidence depths at 150 N output force were 2.0±0.3 mm for 5 PCF, 1.8±0.2 mm for 10 PCF, 1.1±0.2 mm for 15 PCF, and 1.1±0.2 mm for 20 PCF bone foam. The mean subsidence depths at 1 Nm of input torque were 2.3±0.5 mm for 5 PCF, 2.3±0.5 mm for 10 PCF, 1.2±0.2 mm for 15 PCF, and 1.1±0.1 mm for 20 PCF bone foam.
Conclusions: Depth of subsidence was negatively correlated with bone foam density at both constant input torque and constant endplate force. Because tactile feedback of cage expansion into the subsiding bone cannot be reliably distinguished from true expansion of disc space height, surgeons should take bone quality into account when deploying expandable cages.
期刊介绍:
Clinical Spine Surgery is the ideal journal for the busy practicing spine surgeon or trainee, as it is the only journal necessary to keep up to date with new clinical research and surgical techniques. Readers get to watch leaders in the field debate controversial topics in a new controversies section, and gain access to evidence-based reviews of important pathologies in the systematic reviews section. The journal features a surgical technique complete with a video, and a tips and tricks section that allows surgeons to review the important steps prior to a complex procedure.
Clinical Spine Surgery provides readers with primary research studies, specifically level 1, 2 and 3 studies, ensuring that articles that may actually change a surgeon’s practice will be read and published. Each issue includes a brief article that will help a surgeon better understand the business of healthcare, as well as an article that will help a surgeon understand how to interpret increasingly complex research methodology. Clinical Spine Surgery is your single source for up-to-date, evidence-based recommendations for spine care.