TY - JOUR
T1 - New rod-plate anterior instrumentation for thoracolumbar/lumbar scoliosis
T2 - Biomechanical evaluation compared with dual-rod and single-rod with structural interbody support
AU - Zhang, Hong
AU - Johnston, Charles E.
AU - Pierce, William A.
AU - Ashman, Richard B.
AU - Bronson, Dwight G.
AU - Haideri, Nessie F.
PY - 2006/12/1
Y1 - 2006/12/1
N2 - STUDY DESIGN. A new rod-plate anterior implant was designed to provide plate fixation at the cephalad and caudal-end segments of a 5-level anterior spine construct. Biomechanical testing was performed on calf spines instrumented with 5-segment anterior scoliosis constructs. OBJECTIVES. To analyze the initial and post-fatigue biomechanical performance of the new implant, and compare it to an anterior dual-rod construct and a single-rod construct with interbody cages. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA. Using single-rod anterior instrumentation for thoracolumbar and lumbar scoliosis, an unacceptable incidence of loss of correction, segmental kyphosis, and pseudarthrosis has been reported. Inadequate construct stiffness due to early postoperative bone-screw interface failure, especially at cephalad and caudal-end vertebrae, has been implicated as the cause of these complications. METHODS. Thirty calf spines were instrumented over 5 segments with: (1) single-rod augmented with rod-plate implants, (2) dual-rod construct, and (3) single-rod with titanium mesh cages. Stiffness in flexion-extension and lateral bending modes was determined initially and post-cyclical loading by measuring segmental range of motion (ROM). Post-fatigue screw pullout tests were also performed. RESULTS. In lateral bending, the caudal-end segmental ROM for rod-plate construct was 54% less than single-rod with cages construct (P < 0.05), with no difference between rod-plate and dual-rod constructs. In flexion-extension, the rod-plate construct showed 45% to 91% (initial test) and 84% to 90% (post-fatigue) less ROM than the single-rod with cages construct (P < 0.001). Again, there was no difference between rod-plate and dual-rod constructs at the cephalad and caudal-end segments. Post-fatigue screw pullout strengths of the rod-plate construct were significantly greater than those of the dual-rod and single-rod with cages constructs (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS. The rod-plate construct was significantly stiffer and provided greater stability of bone-screw interfacethan the single-rod with cages construct. It achieved similar stiffness and improved bone-screw interface stability compared to dual-rod construct.
AB - STUDY DESIGN. A new rod-plate anterior implant was designed to provide plate fixation at the cephalad and caudal-end segments of a 5-level anterior spine construct. Biomechanical testing was performed on calf spines instrumented with 5-segment anterior scoliosis constructs. OBJECTIVES. To analyze the initial and post-fatigue biomechanical performance of the new implant, and compare it to an anterior dual-rod construct and a single-rod construct with interbody cages. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA. Using single-rod anterior instrumentation for thoracolumbar and lumbar scoliosis, an unacceptable incidence of loss of correction, segmental kyphosis, and pseudarthrosis has been reported. Inadequate construct stiffness due to early postoperative bone-screw interface failure, especially at cephalad and caudal-end vertebrae, has been implicated as the cause of these complications. METHODS. Thirty calf spines were instrumented over 5 segments with: (1) single-rod augmented with rod-plate implants, (2) dual-rod construct, and (3) single-rod with titanium mesh cages. Stiffness in flexion-extension and lateral bending modes was determined initially and post-cyclical loading by measuring segmental range of motion (ROM). Post-fatigue screw pullout tests were also performed. RESULTS. In lateral bending, the caudal-end segmental ROM for rod-plate construct was 54% less than single-rod with cages construct (P < 0.05), with no difference between rod-plate and dual-rod constructs. In flexion-extension, the rod-plate construct showed 45% to 91% (initial test) and 84% to 90% (post-fatigue) less ROM than the single-rod with cages construct (P < 0.001). Again, there was no difference between rod-plate and dual-rod constructs at the cephalad and caudal-end segments. Post-fatigue screw pullout strengths of the rod-plate construct were significantly greater than those of the dual-rod and single-rod with cages constructs (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS. The rod-plate construct was significantly stiffer and provided greater stability of bone-screw interfacethan the single-rod with cages construct. It achieved similar stiffness and improved bone-screw interface stability compared to dual-rod construct.
KW - Biomechanical evaluation
KW - Dual-rod anterior system
KW - Rod-plate anterior system
KW - Single-rod with cages
KW - Thoracolumbar and lumbar scoliosis
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33845359411&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33845359411&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/01.brs.0000247956.00599.a3
DO - 10.1097/01.brs.0000247956.00599.a3
M3 - Article
C2 - 17139209
AN - SCOPUS:33845359411
SN - 0362-2436
VL - 31
SP - E934-E940
JO - Spine
JF - Spine
IS - 25
ER -