Biomechanical comparison between cortical screw-rod construct versus pedicle screw-rod construct in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

OBJECTIVE: To compare construct stiffness of cortical screw (CS)-rod transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) construct (G2) versus pedicle screw (PS)-rod TLIF construct (G1) in the standardized porcine lumbar spine. METHODS: Six porcine lumbar spines (L2-L5) were separated into 12 functiona...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Chan, C.Y.W., Sem, S.W., Bashir, E.S., Saw, L.B., Shanmugam, R., Kwan, M.K.
Format: Article
Published: SAGE Publications (UK and US) 2017
Subjects:
Online Access:http://eprints.um.edu.my/18923/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2309499017690656
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
id my.um.eprints.18923
record_format eprints
spelling my.um.eprints.189232018-07-27T01:18:23Z http://eprints.um.edu.my/18923/ Biomechanical comparison between cortical screw-rod construct versus pedicle screw-rod construct in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion Chan, C.Y.W. Sem, S.W. Bashir, E.S. Saw, L.B. Shanmugam, R. Kwan, M.K. R Medicine OBJECTIVE: To compare construct stiffness of cortical screw (CS)-rod transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) construct (G2) versus pedicle screw (PS)-rod TLIF construct (G1) in the standardized porcine lumbar spine. METHODS: Six porcine lumbar spines (L2-L5) were separated into 12 functional spine units. Bilateral total facetectomies and interlaminar decompression were performed for all specimens. Non-destructive loading to assess stiffness in lateral bending, flexion and extension as well as axial rotation was performed using a universal material testing machine. RESULTS: PS and CS constructs were significantly stiffer than the intact spine except in axial rotation. Using the normalized ratio to the intact spine, there is no significant difference between the stiffness of PS and CS: flexion (1.41 ± 0.27, 1.55 ± 0.32), extension (1.98 ± 0.49, 2.25 ± 0.44), right lateral flexion (1.93 ± 0.57, 1.55 ± 0.30), left lateral flexion (2.00 ± 0.73, 2.16 ± 0.20), right axial rotation (0.99 ± 0.21, 0.83 ± 0.26) and left axial rotation (0.96 ± 0.22, 0.92 ± 0.25). CONCLUSION: The CS-rod TLIF construct provided comparable construct stiffness to a traditional PS-rod TLIF construct in a 'standardized' porcine lumbar spine model. SAGE Publications (UK and US) 2017 Article PeerReviewed Chan, C.Y.W. and Sem, S.W. and Bashir, E.S. and Saw, L.B. and Shanmugam, R. and Kwan, M.K. (2017) Biomechanical comparison between cortical screw-rod construct versus pedicle screw-rod construct in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery, 25 (1). pp. 1-8. ISSN 2309-4990 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2309499017690656 doi:10.1177/2309499017690656
institution Universiti Malaya
building UM Library
collection Institutional Repository
continent Asia
country Malaysia
content_provider Universiti Malaya
content_source UM Research Repository
url_provider http://eprints.um.edu.my/
topic R Medicine
spellingShingle R Medicine
Chan, C.Y.W.
Sem, S.W.
Bashir, E.S.
Saw, L.B.
Shanmugam, R.
Kwan, M.K.
Biomechanical comparison between cortical screw-rod construct versus pedicle screw-rod construct in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion
description OBJECTIVE: To compare construct stiffness of cortical screw (CS)-rod transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) construct (G2) versus pedicle screw (PS)-rod TLIF construct (G1) in the standardized porcine lumbar spine. METHODS: Six porcine lumbar spines (L2-L5) were separated into 12 functional spine units. Bilateral total facetectomies and interlaminar decompression were performed for all specimens. Non-destructive loading to assess stiffness in lateral bending, flexion and extension as well as axial rotation was performed using a universal material testing machine. RESULTS: PS and CS constructs were significantly stiffer than the intact spine except in axial rotation. Using the normalized ratio to the intact spine, there is no significant difference between the stiffness of PS and CS: flexion (1.41 ± 0.27, 1.55 ± 0.32), extension (1.98 ± 0.49, 2.25 ± 0.44), right lateral flexion (1.93 ± 0.57, 1.55 ± 0.30), left lateral flexion (2.00 ± 0.73, 2.16 ± 0.20), right axial rotation (0.99 ± 0.21, 0.83 ± 0.26) and left axial rotation (0.96 ± 0.22, 0.92 ± 0.25). CONCLUSION: The CS-rod TLIF construct provided comparable construct stiffness to a traditional PS-rod TLIF construct in a 'standardized' porcine lumbar spine model.
format Article
author Chan, C.Y.W.
Sem, S.W.
Bashir, E.S.
Saw, L.B.
Shanmugam, R.
Kwan, M.K.
author_facet Chan, C.Y.W.
Sem, S.W.
Bashir, E.S.
Saw, L.B.
Shanmugam, R.
Kwan, M.K.
author_sort Chan, C.Y.W.
title Biomechanical comparison between cortical screw-rod construct versus pedicle screw-rod construct in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion
title_short Biomechanical comparison between cortical screw-rod construct versus pedicle screw-rod construct in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion
title_full Biomechanical comparison between cortical screw-rod construct versus pedicle screw-rod construct in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion
title_fullStr Biomechanical comparison between cortical screw-rod construct versus pedicle screw-rod construct in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion
title_full_unstemmed Biomechanical comparison between cortical screw-rod construct versus pedicle screw-rod construct in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion
title_sort biomechanical comparison between cortical screw-rod construct versus pedicle screw-rod construct in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion
publisher SAGE Publications (UK and US)
publishDate 2017
url http://eprints.um.edu.my/18923/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2309499017690656
_version_ 1643690834035474432
score 13.18916