A comparison of the biomechanical stability of pedicle-lengthening screws and traditional pedicle screws AN IN VITRO INSTANT AND FATIGUE-RESISTANT PULL-OUT TEST

作者：Qian, L.; Jiang, C.; Sun, P.; Xu, D.; Wang, Y.; Fu, M.; Zhong, S.; Ouyang, J.^*

来源：Bone & Joint Journal, 2018, 100B(4): 516-521.

DOI：10.1302/0301-620X.100B4.BJJ-2017-0877.R1

• LUMBAR SPINAL STENOSIS
• CEMENT AUGMENTATION
• CADAVERIC SPINES
• CANAL VOLUME
• STRENGTH
• BONE
• OSTEOTOMY
• FIXATION
• INSTRUMENTATION
• RESTORATION

Aims @@@ The aim of this study was to compare the peak pull-out force (PPF) of pedicle-lengthening screws (PLS) and traditional pedicle screws (TPS) using instant and cyclic fatigue testing. @@@ Materials and Methods @@@ A total of 60 lumbar vertebrae were divided into six groups: PLS submitted to instant pullout and fatigue-resistance testing (groups A1 and A2, respectively), TPS submitted to instant pull-out and fatigue-resistance testing (groups B1 and B2, respectively) and PLS augmented with 2 ml polymethylmethacrylate, submitted to instant pull-out and fatigueresistance testing (groups C1 and C2, respectively). The PPF and normalized PPF (PPFn) for bone mineral density (BMD) were compared within and between all groups. @@@ Results @@@ In all groups, BMD was significantly correlated with PPF (r = 0.83, p < 0.001). The PPFn in A1 was significantly less than in B1 (p = 0.006) and C1 (p = 0.002). The PPFn of A2 was significantly less than in B2 (p < 0.001) and C2 (p < 0.001). The PPFn in A1, B1, and C1 was significantly greater than in A2 (p = 0.002), B2 (p = 0.027), and C2 (p = 0.003). There were no significant differences in PPFn between B1 and C1, or between B2 and C2. @@@ Conclusion @@@ Pedicle lengthening screws with cement augmentation can provide the same fixation stability as traditional pedicle screws and may be a viable clinical option.

• 出版日期2018-4
• 单位南方医科大学