Biomechanical characteristics of integrated expandable repositionable cage through lateral anterior approach

doi:10.12307/2023.272

Abstract

Abstract: BACKGROUND: In vitro experiments have confirmed that although the integrated interbody cage can be implanted from the side, it does not have the ability to adjust the height of the intervertebral cage and adjust the reduction function of lumbar spondylolisthesis after implantation. Therefore, the present study designed a new lumbar surgical procedure: oblique lumbar interbody fusion with an integrated expandable repositionable cage fixation (OLIF+IERC), and studied the biomechanical performance of OLIF+IERC.
OBJECTIVE: To explore the biomechanical performance differences of the OLIF+IERC surgical model in this study, compared with the normal lumbar spine finite element model, OLIF stand-alone without fixation system (stand-alone OLIF) model, and OLIF with posterior bilateral pedicle screws fixation (OLIF+BPS) model.
METHODS: The established and validated normal model (L3-S1) was suitably modified to establish three kinds of OLIF surgical models: stand-alone OLIF, OLIF+BPS, and OLIF+IERC designed in this study. By applying a 500 N follower load and a moment load of 7.5 N·m in different directions (flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation) to each model, the various biomechanical indicators of the different models were compared.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: (1) For range of motion, maximum cage stress, and maximum endplate stress at L4-L5, OLIF+IERC was lower than other surgical models in axial rotation; stand-alone OLIF was highest in all motion postures; OLIF+BPS was lowest in flexion, extension, and lateral bending. (2) Taken together, the biomechanical stability, resistance to cage subsidence, and disc height reduction of OLIF+IERC were superior to stand-alone OLIF in all motion postures and superior to OLIF+BPS in motion posture of axial rotation. (3) This study suggests that OLIF+IERC may be considered as a surgical procedure for future surgical treatment of patients with degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. This study provides a valuable reference for the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases.

Key words: oblique lumbar interbody fusion, integrated expandable repositionable cage, lumbar slippage, biomechanics, finite element

CLC Number:

Zhang Hong, Wu Aimin, Li Junwei, Cai Xinyi, Ren Yanan, Du Chengfei. Biomechanical characteristics of integrated expandable repositionable cage through lateral anterior approach[J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2023, 27(13): 1975-1980.

Figures/Tables 3

References

[1] MAYER HM. A new microsurgical technique for minimally invasive anterior lumbar interbody fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976).1997;22(6): 691-699;discussion 700.
[2] SILVESTRE C, MAC-THIONG JM, HILMI R, et al. Complications and Morbidities of Mini-open Anterior Retroperitoneal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion in 179 Patients. Asian Spine J. 2012;6(2):89-97.
[3] LI JX, PHAN K, MOBBS R. Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Technical Aspects, Operative Outcomes, and Complications. World Neurosurg. 2017;98:113-123.
[4] ABE K, ORITA S, MANNOJI C, et al. Perioperative Complications in 155 Patients Who Underwent Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion Surgery: Perspectives and Indications From a Retrospective, Multicenter Survey. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2017;42(1):55-62.
[5] WOODS KR, BILLYS JB, HYNES RA. Technical description of oblique lateral interbody fusion at L1-L5 (OLIF25) and at L5-S1 (OLIF51) and evaluation of complication and fusion rates. Spine J. 2017;17(4):545-553.
[6] ST CLAIR S, TAN JS, LIEBERMAN I. Oblique lumbar interbody fixation: a biomechanical study in human spines. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2012;25(4): 183-189.
[7] GUO HZ, TANG YC, GUO DQ, et al. Stability Evaluation of Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion Constructs with Various Fixation Options: A Finite Element Analysis Based on Three-Dimensional Scanning Models.World Neurosurg. 2020;138:e530-e538.
[8] SORIANO-BARON H, NEWCOMB AGUS, MALHOTRA D, et al. Biomechanical Effects of an Oblique Lumbar PEEK Cage and Posterior Augmentation. World Neurosurg. 2019;126:e975-e981.
[9] 殷飞,马荣,蔡则成,等.斜外侧椎间融合联合单侧椎弓根钉棒固定术的三维有限元分析[J].中国脊柱脊髓杂志,2019,29(8): 732-740.
[10] 宋成杰,常恒瑞,石明鑫,等.侧方入路腰椎融合治疗后的生物力学稳定性的研究与进展[J].中国组织工程研究,2021,25(6):923-928.
[11] BASRA S, BUCKLEN B, MUZUMDAR A, et al.A novel lateral lumbar integrated plate-spacer interbody implant: in vitro biomechanical analysis. Spine J. 2015;15(2):322-328.
[12] 何磊,张伟,陈瑞强,等.新型腰椎侧路一体化钛板融合器的研制及生物力学测试[J].中华实验外科杂志,2017,34(2):264-266.
[13] DU CF, CAI XY, GUI W, et al. Does oblique lumbar interbody fusion promote adjacent degeneration in degenerative disc disease: A finite element analysis. Comput Biol Med. 2021;128:104122.
[14] DU CF, YANG N, GUO JC, et al. Biomechanical response of lumbar facet joints under follower preload: a finite element study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2016;17:126.
[15] LU T, LU Y. Comparison of Biomechanical Performance Among Posterolateral Fusion and Transforaminal, Extreme, and Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Finite Element Analysis. World Neurosurg, 2019;129:e890-e899.
[16] CHEN YL, LAI OJ, WANG Y, et al. The biomechanical study of a modified lumbar interbody fusion-crenel lateral interbody fusion (CLIF): a three-dimensional finite-element analysis. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin. 2020;23(9):548-555.
[17] DU C, MO Z, TIAN S, et al. Biomechanical investigation of thoracolumbar spine in different postures during ejection using a combined finite element and multi-body approach. Int J Numer Method Biomed Eng. 2014;30(11):1121-1131.
[18] KRAIWATTANAPONG C, ARNUNTASUPAKUL V, KANTAWAN R, et al. Malposition of Cage in Minimally Invasive Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion. Case Rep Orthop. 2018;2018:9142074.
[19] CHUNG NS, LEE HD, JEON CH. Accuracy of the lateral cage placement under intraoperative C-arm fluoroscopy in oblique lateral interbody fusion. J Orthop Sci. 2018;23(6):918-922.
[20] KIM HJ, KANG KT, CHANG BS, et al. Biomechanical analysis of fusion segment rigidity upon stress at both the fusion and adjacent segments: a comparison between unilateral and bilateral pedicle screw fixation. Yonsei Med J. 2014;55(5):1386-1394.
[21] TSUANG FY, TSAI JC, LAI DM. Effect of lordosis on adjacent levels after lumbar interbody fusion, before and after removal of the spinal fixator: a finite element analysis. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2019;20(1):470.
[22] RAO RD, DAVID KS, WANG M. Biomechanical changes at adjacent segments following anterior lumbar interbody fusion using tapered cages. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005;30(24):2772-2776.
[23] AMBATI DV, WRIGHT EK JR, LEHMAN RA JR, et al. Bilateral pedicle screw fixation provides superior biomechanical stability in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a finite element study. Spine J. 2015;15(8): 1812-1822.
[24] CHEN CS, CHENG CK, LIU CL,et al. Stress analysis of the disc adjacent to interbody fusion in lumbar spine. Med Eng Phys. 2001;23(7):483-491.
[25] KIM MC, CHUNG HT, CHO JL, et al. Subsidence of polyetheretherketone cage after minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2013;26(2):87-92.
[26] GALBUSERA F, MIETSCH A, SCHMIDT H, et al. Effect of intervertebral disc degeneration on disc cell viability: a numerical investigation. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin. 2013;16(3):328-337.
[27] Wáng YXJ, Deng M, He LC, et al. Osteoporotic vertebral endplate and cortex fractures: A pictorial review. J Orthop Translat. 2018;15:35-49.
[28] LE TV, BAAJ AA, DAKWAR E, et al. Subsidence of polyetheretherketone intervertebral cages in minimally invasive lateral retroperitoneal transpsoas lumbar interbody fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2012;37(14): 1268-1273.
[29] CHEN JF, LEE ST. The polymethyl methacrylate cervical cage for treatment of cervical disk disease Part III. Biomechanical properties. Surg Neurol. 2006;66(4):367-370;discussion 370.