Biomechanical Comparison of Internal Fixation by Traditional and Cortical Bone Trajectory Pedicle Screw
10.16156/j.1004-7220.2023.01.04
- VernacularTitle:传统与皮质骨轨迹椎弓根螺钉内固定术的生物力学对比
- Author:
Hongtao ZHAO
1
;
Haisheng YANG
2
Author Information
1. Department of Biomedical Engineering, School of Environment and Life Sciences, Beijing University of Technology;Puyang Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine
2. Department of Biomedical Engineering, School of Environment and Life Sciences, Beijing University of Technology
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
pedicle screw;
cortical bone trajectory ( CBT );
traditional trajectory ( TT );
internal fixation;
osteoporosis
- From:
Journal of Medical Biomechanics
2023;38(1):E030-E036
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To compare the effects of cortical bone trajectory ( CBT) and traditional trajectory ( TT)pedicle screw internal fixation on the range of motion (ROM) and rod system stress of normal and osteoporotic(OP) spines. Methods The L3-S1 finite element models of normal and OP spines were established. The screwrod system with two kinds of trajectory was used for internal fixation of the L4-5 segment, so as to simulate sixphysiological loads, namely, flexion, extension, left / right bending, left / right rotation. The effects of two internalfixation methods on ROMs and maximum equivalent stress of screws in normal and OP spines were compared.Results For both bone conditions, CBT and TT significantly reduced ROM of the fixed segment (L4-5) and theentire segment of lower lumbar spine ( L3-S1). However, the ROM decline of CBT group was slightly smaller than that of TT group, and their ROMs were similar under flexion and extension, but the ROM differences were significant under lateral bending and axial rotation. In addition, for both the normal and OP spine models, themaximum equivalent stress of screws in CBT group was significantly higher than that in TT group. Compared withTT group, the screw stress of CBT group in normal spine model under flexion and extension, lateral bending,axial rotation was increased by 27% , 268% and 58% , respectively. However, when CBT technique was used atthe same time, the OP spine model had a smaller screw stress distribution than the normal spine model.Conclusions Compared with TT technique, CBT technique can achieve higher screw stress under OP conditionand reduce screw stress concentration under normal bone condition. In addition, CBT slightly increases ROMs of each segment, which is conducive to recovery of spinal physiological function after surgery. Lateral bending and axial rotation can produce negative mechanical effects, and these two physiological loads should be avoided.
