A biomechanical comparison of posterior fixation approaches in lumbar fusion using computed tomography based lumbosacral spine modelling
- 18 January 2023
- journal article
- research article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part H: Journal of Engineering in Medicine
- Vol. 237 (2), 243-253
- https://doi.org/10.1177/09544119221149119
Abstract
Extreme lateral interbody fusion (XLIF) may be performed with a standalone interbody cage, or with the addition of unilateral or bilateral pedicle screws; however, decisions regarding supplemental fixation are predominantly based on clinical indicators. This study examines the impact of posterior supplemental fixation on facet micromotions, cage loads and load-patterns at adjacent levels in a L4-L5 XLIF at early and late fusion stages. CT data from an asymptomatic subject were segmented into anatomical regions and digitally stitched into a surface mesh of the lumbosacral spine (L1-S1). The interbody cage and posterior instrumentation (unilateral and bilateral) were inserted at L4-L5. The volumetric mesh was imported into finite element software for pre-processing, running nonlinear static solves and post-processing. Loads and micromotions at the index-level facets reduced commensurately with the extent of posterior fixation accompanying the XLIF, while load-pattern changes observed at adjacent facets may be anatomically dependent. In flexion at partial fusion, compressive stress on the cage reduced by 54% and 72% in unilateral and bilateral models respectively; in extension the reductions were 58% and 75% compared to standalone XLIF. A similar pattern was observed at full fusion. Unilateral fixation provided similar stability compared to bilateral, however there was a reduction in cage stress-risers with the bilateral instrumentation. No changes were found at adjacent discs. Posterior supplemental fixation alters biomechanics at the index and adjacent levels in a manner that warrants consideration alongside clinical information. Unilateral instrumentation is a more efficient option where the stability requirements and subsidence risk are not excessive.Keywords
This publication has 31 references indexed in Scilit:
- Unilateral versus bilateral instrumented transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in two-level degenerative lumbar disorders: a prospective randomised studyInternational Orthopaedics, 2013
- Congenital hypoplasia or aplasia of the lumbosacral pedicle as an unusual cause of spondylolisthesis in the pediatric age groupJournal of Neurosurgery: Pediatrics, 2013
- Biomechanical Evaluation of an Endplate-Conformed Polycaprolactone-Hydroxyapatite Intervertebral Fusion Graft and Its Comparison With a Typical Nonconformed Cortical GraftJournal of Biomechanical Engineering, 2013
- Lateral Interbody Fusion for Treatment of Discogenic Low Back Pain: Minimally Invasive Surgical TechniquesAdvances in Orthopedics, 2012
- Stand-Alone Lateral Interbody Fusion for the Treatment of Low-Grade Degenerative SpondylolisthesisThe Scientific World Journal, 2012
- Evaluation of Indirect Decompression of the Lumbar Spinal Canal Following Minimally Invasive Lateral Transpsoas Interbody Fusion: Radiographic and Outcome Analysismin - Minimally Invasive Neurosurgery, 2011
- Extreme Lateral Interbody Fusion (XLIF): a novel surgical technique for anterior lumbar interbody fusionThe Spine Journal, 2006
- Application of a new calibration method for a three-dimensional finite element model of a human lumbar annulus fibrosusClinical Biomechanics, 2006
- Minimally Invasive Lumbar FusionSpine, 2003
- Ligaments of the lumbar spine: a reviewSurgical and Radiologic Anatomy, 1988