Medical Engineering & Physics
Volume 32, Issue 2 , Pages 203-211, March 2010

Biomechanical comparisons of different posterior instrumentation constructs after two-level ALIF: A finite element study

  • Chang-Yuan Fan

      Affiliations

    • Department of Mechanical Engineering, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taipei, Taiwan
  • ,
  • Ching-Chi Hsu

      Affiliations

    • Graduate Institute of Engineering, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taipei, Taiwan
  • ,
  • Ching-Kong Chao

      Affiliations

    • Department of Mechanical Engineering, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taipei, Taiwan
  • ,
  • Shang-Chih Lin

      Affiliations

    • Department of Mechanical Engineering, National Central University, Taoyuan, Taiwan
  • ,
  • Kuo-Hua Chao

      Affiliations

    • Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Tri-Service General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author at: Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Tri-Service General Hospital, No. 325, Sec. 2, Cheng-Kung Rd., Neihu 114, Taipei, Taiwan. Tel.: +886 2 87927185; fax: +886 2 87927186.

Received 23 March 2009; received in revised form 8 December 2009; accepted 13 December 2009. published online 11 January 2010.

Abstract 

Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) with cylindrical cages and supplemental posterior fixation has been widely used for internal disc derangement. However, most researchers have focused on single-level ALIF. Therefore, the biomechanical performance of various fixation constructs after two-level ALIF is not well characterized. This research used three-dimensional finite element models (FEM) with a nonlinear contact analysis to evaluate the initial biomechanical behavior of five types of fixation devices after two-level ALIF (L3/L4, L4/L5) under six loading conditions. These fixation constructs included a three-level pedicle screw and rod, a two-level translaminar facet screw, a two-level transfacet pedicle screw, a bisegmental pedicle screw and rod, and a bisegmental pedicle screw and rod with cross-linking. The FEM's developed in this study demonstrate that, compared to the other four types of posterior fixation constructs analyzed, the three-level pedicle screw and rod provide the best biomechanical stability. Both two-level facet screw fixation constructs showed unfavorable loading in lateral bending. For the construct of the three-level pedicle screw and rod, the middle-segment pedicle screw should not be omitted even though a cross-link is used. The two-level ALIF models with cages and posterior fixation constructs that we developed can be used to evaluate the initial biomechanical performance of a wide variety of posterior fixation devices prior to surgery.

Keywords: Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF), Two-level fusion, Posterior fixation, Pedicle screw fixation, Translaminar facet screw fixation, Transfacet pedicle screw fixation, Finite element analysis

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S1350-4533(09)00263-X

doi:10.1016/j.medengphy.2009.12.002

Medical Engineering & Physics
Volume 32, Issue 2 , Pages 203-211, March 2010