Figure 2 - available via license: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
Content may be subject to copyright.
Source publication
It is technically demanding and requires rich experience to insert the translaminar facet screw(TFS) via the paramedian mini-incision approach. It seems that it is easy to place the TFS using computer-assisted design and rapid prototyping(RP) techniques. However, the accuracy and safety of these techniques is still unknown. The aim of this study is...
Context in source publication
Context 1
... screw trajectories were confirmed, screw guides were designed, which included matching, connecting and channel parts. The matching part was only matched to the region on one sole vertebral body without crossing the vertebral joint ( Figure 2). According to guide design diagrams, actual guides were printed with a rapid prototyping technique. ...
Similar publications
![Figure 1. Garment keypad for MP3 player [3]](profile/Matthew-Sunderland-2/publication/341662127/figure/fig1/AS:895619027705857@1590543624217/Garment-keypad-for-MP3-player-3_Q320.jpg)
Three interconnection systems were chosen as suitable for incorporation into the "Softswitch" project. These systems were Nicomatic (UK) Ltd Crimpflex® connectors, Berg 65801 series Clincher connectors and Rivfast gripper snaps (poppers). Suitable fabric substrates were found and developed for attaching the connectors onto. The two substrates deve...
Citations
... Several studies have also demonstrated the biomechanical advantages of transforaminal pedicle screw fixation in terms of reducing flexion, extension and rotation [38,50,51]. Biomechanical and clinical studies have shown that UPS-CTFS can achieve stability and fusion rates similar to those of BPS [52][53][54]. In addition, the OLIF is long and wide and can be adjusted, and the CAGE can pass through the entire vertebral body and be fixed to the endplate bone surface with relative stability. ...
Background
Little is known about the biomechanical performance of different internal fixations in oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF). Here, finite element (FE) analysis was used to describe the biomechanics of various internal fixations and compare and explore the stability of each fixation.
Methods
CT scans of a patient with lumbar degenerative disease were performed, and the l3-S1 model was constructed using relevant software. The other five FE models were constructed by simulating the model operation and adding different related implants, including (1) an intact model, (2) a stand-alone (SA) model with no instrument, (3) a unilateral pedicle screw model (UPS), (4) a unilateral pedicle screw contralateral translaminar facet screw model (UPS-CTFS), (5) a bilateral pedicle screw (BPS) model, and (6) a cortical bone trajectory screw model (CBT). Various motion loads were set by FE software to simulate lumbar vertebral activity. The software was also used to extract the range of motion (ROM) of the surgical segment, CAGE and fixation stress in the different models.
Results
The SA group had the greatest ROM and CAGE stress. The ROM of the BPS and UPS-CTFS was not significantly different among motion loadings. Compared with the other three models, the BPS model had lower internal fixation stress among loading conditions, and the CBT screw internal fixation had the highest stress among loads.
Conclusions
The BPS model provided the best biomechanical stability for OLIF. The SA model was relatively less stable. The UPS-CTFS group had reduced ROM in the fusion segments, but the stresses on the internal fixation and CAGE were relatively higher in the than in the BPS group; the CBT group had a lower flexion and extension ROM and higher rotation and lateral flexion ROM than the BPS group. The stability of the CBT group was poorer than that of the BPS and LPS-CTFS groups. The CAGE and internal fixation stress was greater in the CBT group.
Little is known about the biomechanical performance of various internal fixations in oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF). In this study, finite element (FE) analysis was used to describe the biomechanical findings of various different internal fixations to compare and explore the stability of each fixation.
METHODS:
Six validated FE models of the L3-S1 segment were reconstructed from computed tomography images, including (1) an intact model, (2)a stand-alone (SA) model with no instrument (3) a unilateral pedicle screw model (UPS), (4) a unilateral pedicle screw contralateral translaminar facet screw model (UPS-CTLFS), (5) a bilateral pedicle screw (BPS) model, and (6) a cortical bone trajectory screw (CBT).Three-dimensional model was performed by computed tomography data, and 150N static force and 10N.m moments in different directions were applied to the models to analyze the validation of the models in comparison with previous studies. Models of the OLIF cage was created with three-dimensional scanning to improve the accuracy of the FE analysis. Range of motion (ROM) of the surgical segment stresses, stress of the cage, and stress of fixation were evaluated in the different models.
RESULTS:
ROM increased from least to greatest as follows: BPS, UPS-CTFS, CBT, UPS, SA. The SA group had the greatest ROM and the SA group had the greatest ROM and stresses on the CAGE. The ROM of the BPS and UPS-CTFS was not significantly different for all motion loadings. Compared with the other three models, the BPS model had lower stresses in internal fixation for all loading conditions and the CBT screw internal fixation had the highest stresses for different loads Compared with the other groups.
CONCLUSIONS
The BPS model provided the best biomechanical stability for OLIF. The SA model was relatively less stable. The UPS-CFTS group reduced the ROM of the fusion segments, but the stresses on the internal fixation and CAGE were relatively higher in the UPS-CFTS Compared with the BPS group; and the CBT group had lower ROM in flexion and extension Compared with the BPS, but its ROM in rotation and lateral flexion was relatively higher. The stability of the CBT was poorer than that of the BPS and LPS-CTFS groups. The stress on the CAGE and internal fixation was greater in the CBT group.
Subcortical screw placement is currently performed using frontal view fluoroscopy or intraoperative O-arm navigation system. The emergence of a novel technique for spinal navigation based on individual navigation templates created using 3D printing technology determines the need to study their safety and effectiveness in subcortical implantation. The aim of the study was to evaluate and compare the efficacy of subcortical implantation of pedicle screws in the lumbar spine using individual navigation templates versus intraoperative fluoroscopy.
Materials and methods:
The study was based on the analysis of treatment results in 39 patients who underwent surgery with subcortical implantation of 130 screws using the MidLIF technique. In group 1, navigation templates were used, in group 2 - intraoperative fluoroscopic control. Comparative analysis of implantation correctness and time, the total operation time, and radiation load was performed.
Results:
The mean distance between the screw and the cortical plate recorded in the groups ranged within 1.20-3.97 mm, without statistically significant difference (p>0.05). The mean time of pedicle screw implantation was 137.0 [115.25; 161.50] s in group 1 and 314.0 [183.50; 403.25] s in group 2. The total operation time was reduced from 173.0 [155.0; 192.25] min in group 2 to 119.0 [108.0; 128.75] min in group 1. The average of 1.0 [1.0; 2.0] X-ray image was performed to place one screw in group 1, while it was 12.0 [10.0; 13.25] in group 2. The differences between the groups in terms of implantation time and radiation load were statistically significant (p<0.05).
Conclusion:
Compared with intraoperative fluoroscopy, the use of individual navigation templates for subcortical implantation of pedicle screws provides their correct positioning with a significant reduction in both operation time and radiation load at similar safety.
