带与不带椎间融合装置的马颈椎椎弓根螺钉和棒结构的体外生物力学比较。

IF 1.3 2区 农林科学 Q2 VETERINARY SCIENCES
Veterinary Surgery Pub Date : 2025-04-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-14 DOI:10.1111/vsu.14226
Lynn M Pezzanite, Brad B Nelson, Amy C Downey, Ben Gadomski, Kirk McGilvray, Kenzie Baer, Sarah M Kappel, Yvette Nout-Lomas, Howard B Seim, Jeremiah T Easley
{"title":"带与不带椎间融合装置的马颈椎椎弓根螺钉和棒结构的体外生物力学比较。","authors":"Lynn M Pezzanite, Brad B Nelson, Amy C Downey, Ben Gadomski, Kirk McGilvray, Kenzie Baer, Sarah M Kappel, Yvette Nout-Lomas, Howard B Seim, Jeremiah T Easley","doi":"10.1111/vsu.14226","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine the biomechanical properties of pedicle screw and rod (PSR) constructs alone and with an interbody fusion device (PSRIFD) for equine ventral cervical vertebral stabilization.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Cadaveric ex vivo biomechanical analysis.</p><p><strong>Sample population: </strong>A total of 14 (n = 14) adult equine cervical vertebral columns.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Cervical vertebral columns were stabilized by PSR alone (n = 6) or PSRIFD (n = 5). Three columns were left unaltered as controls. Non-destructive biomechanical testing showed the kinematic range of motion (ROM), compliance, and neutral zone of each spinal unit in the three main kinematic directions (flexion-extension, lateral bending and axial rotation). Destructive testing was performed to identify mode of failure and stiffness in flexion. Non-destructive and destructive biomechanical data were compared by ANOVA between experimental groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In flexion-extension, PSR and PSRIFD had significantly lower ROM, compliance and neutral zone than controls (all p < .05). ROM, compliance and neutral zone were not different between PSR and PSRIFD groups. In axial rotation, the neutral zone of PSR was lower than PSRIFD (p = .013) and both were lower than controls (p < .0001 and p < .02, respectively). Stiffness and moment failure between PSR and PSRIFD groups were not different. All constructs failed through articular process joint dislocation, though the PSRIFD group also had ventral IFD migration.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>PSR and PSRIFD groups have similar biomechanical properties and modes of failure, though PSRIFD had higher catastrophic injury potential.</p><p><strong>Clinical significance: </strong>These findings support that PSR constructs provide comparable biomechanical stability to PSRIFD, reducing time and potential complications associated with IFD placement.</p>","PeriodicalId":23667,"journal":{"name":"Veterinary Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"610-620"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ex vivo biomechanical comparison of pedicle screw and rod constructs with and without interbody fusion devices for equine cervical vertebral stabilization.\",\"authors\":\"Lynn M Pezzanite, Brad B Nelson, Amy C Downey, Ben Gadomski, Kirk McGilvray, Kenzie Baer, Sarah M Kappel, Yvette Nout-Lomas, Howard B Seim, Jeremiah T Easley\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/vsu.14226\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine the biomechanical properties of pedicle screw and rod (PSR) constructs alone and with an interbody fusion device (PSRIFD) for equine ventral cervical vertebral stabilization.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Cadaveric ex vivo biomechanical analysis.</p><p><strong>Sample population: </strong>A total of 14 (n = 14) adult equine cervical vertebral columns.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Cervical vertebral columns were stabilized by PSR alone (n = 6) or PSRIFD (n = 5). Three columns were left unaltered as controls. Non-destructive biomechanical testing showed the kinematic range of motion (ROM), compliance, and neutral zone of each spinal unit in the three main kinematic directions (flexion-extension, lateral bending and axial rotation). Destructive testing was performed to identify mode of failure and stiffness in flexion. Non-destructive and destructive biomechanical data were compared by ANOVA between experimental groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In flexion-extension, PSR and PSRIFD had significantly lower ROM, compliance and neutral zone than controls (all p < .05). ROM, compliance and neutral zone were not different between PSR and PSRIFD groups. In axial rotation, the neutral zone of PSR was lower than PSRIFD (p = .013) and both were lower than controls (p < .0001 and p < .02, respectively). Stiffness and moment failure between PSR and PSRIFD groups were not different. All constructs failed through articular process joint dislocation, though the PSRIFD group also had ventral IFD migration.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>PSR and PSRIFD groups have similar biomechanical properties and modes of failure, though PSRIFD had higher catastrophic injury potential.</p><p><strong>Clinical significance: </strong>These findings support that PSR constructs provide comparable biomechanical stability to PSRIFD, reducing time and potential complications associated with IFD placement.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23667,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Veterinary Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"610-620\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Veterinary Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/vsu.14226\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/2/14 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"VETERINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Veterinary Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/vsu.14226","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:探讨椎弓根螺钉与棒(PSR)单独及与椎体间融合装置(PSRIFD)联合用于马颈前段椎体稳定的生物力学特性。研究设计:尸体离体生物力学分析。样本总体:共14 (n = 14)匹成年马颈椎。方法:分别用PSR (n = 6)和PSRIFD (n = 5)稳定颈椎。三列作为对照保持不变。非破坏性生物力学测试显示了每个脊柱单元在三个主要运动方向(屈伸、侧向弯曲和轴向旋转)的运动范围(ROM)、顺应性和中性区。进行了破坏性测试,以确定破坏模式和屈曲刚度。各组间无损与破坏性生物力学数据采用方差分析进行比较。结果:在屈伸关节中,PSR组和PSRIFD组的ROM、顺应性和中性区明显低于对照组(均p)。结论:PSR组和PSRIFD组具有相似的生物力学特性和失效模式,但PSRIFD组具有更高的灾难性损伤潜力。临床意义:这些发现支持PSR结构提供与PSRIFD相当的生物力学稳定性,减少了放置IFD的时间和潜在并发症。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Ex vivo biomechanical comparison of pedicle screw and rod constructs with and without interbody fusion devices for equine cervical vertebral stabilization.

Objective: To determine the biomechanical properties of pedicle screw and rod (PSR) constructs alone and with an interbody fusion device (PSRIFD) for equine ventral cervical vertebral stabilization.

Study design: Cadaveric ex vivo biomechanical analysis.

Sample population: A total of 14 (n = 14) adult equine cervical vertebral columns.

Methods: Cervical vertebral columns were stabilized by PSR alone (n = 6) or PSRIFD (n = 5). Three columns were left unaltered as controls. Non-destructive biomechanical testing showed the kinematic range of motion (ROM), compliance, and neutral zone of each spinal unit in the three main kinematic directions (flexion-extension, lateral bending and axial rotation). Destructive testing was performed to identify mode of failure and stiffness in flexion. Non-destructive and destructive biomechanical data were compared by ANOVA between experimental groups.

Results: In flexion-extension, PSR and PSRIFD had significantly lower ROM, compliance and neutral zone than controls (all p < .05). ROM, compliance and neutral zone were not different between PSR and PSRIFD groups. In axial rotation, the neutral zone of PSR was lower than PSRIFD (p = .013) and both were lower than controls (p < .0001 and p < .02, respectively). Stiffness and moment failure between PSR and PSRIFD groups were not different. All constructs failed through articular process joint dislocation, though the PSRIFD group also had ventral IFD migration.

Conclusion: PSR and PSRIFD groups have similar biomechanical properties and modes of failure, though PSRIFD had higher catastrophic injury potential.

Clinical significance: These findings support that PSR constructs provide comparable biomechanical stability to PSRIFD, reducing time and potential complications associated with IFD placement.

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
Veterinary Surgery
Veterinary Surgery 农林科学-兽医学
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
22.20%
发文量
162
审稿时长
8-16 weeks
期刊介绍: Veterinary Surgery, the official publication of the American College of Veterinary Surgeons and European College of Veterinary Surgeons, is a source of up-to-date coverage of surgical and anesthetic management of animals, addressing significant problems in veterinary surgery with relevant case histories and observations. It contains original, peer-reviewed articles that cover developments in veterinary surgery, and presents the most current review of the field, with timely articles on surgical techniques, diagnostic aims, care of infections, and advances in knowledge of metabolism as it affects the surgical patient. The journal places new developments in perspective, encompassing new concepts and peer commentary to help better understand and evaluate the surgical patient.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信