Total disc replacement positioning affects facet contact forces and vertebral body strains

Spine

Volumn 33, Issue 23, 2008, Pages 2510-2517

  Rundell, Steven A ^a,b,c   Auerbach, Joshua D ^a   Balderston, Richard A ^a   Kurtz, Steven M ^a,b  

^a PENNSYLVANIA HOSPITAL   (United States)

^b DREXEL UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c EXPONENT INC   (United States)

Author keywords

Facet forces; Finite element; Lumbar total disc replacement; ProDisc; Subsidence

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; LUMBAR SPINE; MODEL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANGE OF MOTION; SPINE MOBILITY; SPINE SURGERY; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING; TOTAL DISC REPLACEMENT; VERTEBRA BODY; AGED; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; BIOMECHANICS; CADAVER; COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH; FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS; HUMAN; INTERVERTEBRAL DISK; JOINT CHARACTERISTICS AND FUNCTIONS; LUMBAR VERTEBRA; MALE; OSTEOLYSIS; PHYSIOLOGY; PROSTHESES AND ORTHOSES; ROTATION; TORQUE; WEIGHT BEARING; ZYGAPOPHYSEAL JOINT;

AGED; BIOMECHANICS; BONE RESORPTION; CADAVER; COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH; FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS; HUMANS; INTERVERTEBRAL DISK; LUMBAR VERTEBRAE; MALE; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; PROSTHESES AND IMPLANTS; RANGE OF MOTION, ARTICULAR; ROTATION; TORQUE; WEIGHT-BEARING; ZYGAPOPHYSEAL JOINT;

EID: 59649113819     PISSN: 03622436     EISSN: 15281159     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318186b258     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Kumar MN, Baklanov A, Chopin D. Correlation between sagittal plane changes and adjacent segment degeneration following lumbar spine fusion. Eur Spine J 2001;10:314-9.
2. Pellise F, Hernandez A, Vidal X, et al. Radiologic assessment of all unfused lumbar segments 7.5 years after instrumented posterior spinal fusion. Spine 2007;32:574-9.
3. Schulte TL, Leistra F, Bullmann V, et al. Disc height reduction in adjacent segments and clinical outcome 10 years after lumbar 360 degrees fusion. Eur Spine J 2007;16:2152-8.
4. Cunningham BW, Gordon JD, Dmitriev AE, et al. Biomechanical evaluation of total disc replacement arthroplasty: an in vitro human cadaveric model. Spine 2003;28:S110-7.
5. Auerbach JD, Wills BP, McIntosh TC, et al. Evaluation of spinal kinematics following lumbar total disc replacement and circumferential fusion using in vivo fluoroscopy. Spine 2007;32:527-36.
6. Mayer HM, Korge A. Non-fusion technology in degenerative lumbar spinal disorders: facts, questions, challenges. Eur Spine J 2002;11(suppl 2):S85-91.
7. PanjabiM, HendersonG, AbjornsonC,etal. Multidirectional testing ofoneand two-level ProDisc-L versus simulated fusions. Spine 2007;32:1311-9.
8. Bertagnoli R, Yue JJ, Nanieva R, et al. Lumbar total disc arthroplasty in patients older than 60 years of age: a prospective study of the ProDisc prosthesis with 2-year minimum follow-up period. J Neurosurg Spine 2006;4: 85-90.
9. David T. Long-term results of one-level lumbar arthroplasty: minimum 10-year follow-up of the CHARITE artificial disc in 106 patients. Spine 2007; 32:661-6.
10. Shim CS, Lee SH, Shin HD, et al. CHARITE versus ProDisc: a comparative study of a minimum 3-year follow-up. Spine 2007;32:1012-8.
11. Huang RC, Lim MR, Girardi FP, et al. The prevalence of contraindications to total disc replacement in a cohort of lumbar surgical patients. Spine 2004; 29:2538-41.
12. Bertagnoli R, Kumar S. Indications for full prosthetic disc arthroplasty: a correlation of clinical outcome against a variety of indications. Eur Spine J 2002;11(suppl 2):S131-6.
13. Link HD. History, design and biomechanics ofthe LINK SB Charite artificial disc. Eur Spine J 2002;11(suppl 2):S98-105.
14. Huang RC, Girardi FP, Cammisa FP Jr, et al. Long-term flexion-extension range of motion of the prodisc total disc replacement. J Spinal Disord Tech 2003;16:435-40.
15. Liu J, Ebraheim NA, Haman SP, et al. Effect of the increase in the height of lumbar disc space on facet joint articulation area in sagittal plane. Spine 2006;31:E198-202.
16. Denoziere G, Ku DN. Biomechanical comparison between fusion of two vertebrae and implantation of an artificial intervertebral disc. J Biomech 2006;39:766-75.
17. Rousseau MA, Bradford DS, Bertagnoli R, et al. Disc arthroplasty design influences intervertebral kinematics and facet forces. Spine J 2006;6: 258-66.
18. Niosi CA, Zhu QA, Wilson DC, et al. Biomechanical characterization of the three-dimensional kinematic behaviour of the Dynesys dynamic stabilization system: an in vitro study. Eur Spine J 2006;15:913-22.
19. Heuer F, Schmidt H, Klezl Z, et al. Stepwise reduction of functional spinal structures increase range of motion and change lordosis angle. J Biomech 2007;40:271-80.
20. van Ooij A, Oner FC, Verbout AJ. Complications of artificial disc replacement: a report of 27 patients with the SB Charite disc. J Spinal Disord Tech 2003;16:369-83.
21. Shim CS, Lee S, Maeng DH, et al. Vertical split fracture of the vertebral body following total disc replacement using ProDisc: report of two cases. J Spinal Disord Tech 2005;18:465-9.
22. Stieber JR, Donald GD III. Early failure of lumbar disc replacement: case report and review of the literature. J Spinal Disord Tech 2006;19:55- 60.
23. Datta JC, Janssen ME, Beckham R, et al. Sagittal split fractures in multilevel cervical arthroplasty using a keeled prosthesis. J Spinal Disord Tech 2007; 20:89-92.
24. Tropiano P, Huang RC, Girardi FP, et al. Lumbar disc replacement: preliminary results with ProDisc II after a minimum follow-up period of 1 year. J Spinal Disord Tech 2003;16:362-8.
25. Buckley JM, Leang DC, Keaveny TM. Sensitivity of vertebral compressive strength to endplate loading distribution. J Biomech Eng 2006;128:641-6.
26. Yosibash Z, Padan R, Joskowicz L, et al. A CT-based high-order finite element analysis of the human proximal femur compared to in-vitro experiments. J Biomech Eng 2007;129:297-309.
27. Sawatari T, Tsumura H, Iesaka K, et al. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty-the influence of tibial component inclination. J Orthop Res 2005;23:549-54.
28. Ulrich D, van Rietbergen B, Laib A, et al. The ability of three-dimensional structural indices to reflect mechanical aspects of trabecular bone. Bone 1999;25:55-60.
29. Morgan EF, Bayraktar HH, Keaveny TM. Trabecular bone modulus-density relationships depend on anatomic site. J Biomech 2003;36:897-904.
30. Kopperdahl DL, Keaveny TM. Yield strain behavior of trabecular bone. J Biomech 1998;31:601-8.
31. Mosekilde L, Danielsen CC. Biomechanical competence of vertebral trabecular bone in relation to ash density and age in normal individuals. Bone 1987;8:79-85.
32. Hansson TH, Keller TS, Panjabi MM. A study of the compressive properties of lumbar vertebral trabeculae: effects of tissue characteristics. Spine 1987; 12:56-62.
33. Kumaresan S, Yoganandan N, Pintar FA, et al. Contribution of disc degeneration to osteophyte formation in the cervical spine: a biomechanical investigation. J Orthop Res 2001;19:977-84.
34. Silva MJ, Keaveny TM, Hayes WC. Load sharing between the shell and centrum in the lumbar vertebral body. Spine 1997;22:140-50.
35. Polikeit A, Nolte LP, Ferguson SJ. The effect of cement augmentation on the load transfer in an osteoporotic functional spinal unit: finite-element analysis. Spine 2003;28:991- 6.
36. Schmidt H, Heuer F, Simon U, etal. Application of a new calibration method for a three-dimensional finite element model of a human lumbar annulus fibrosus. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon ) 2006;21:337-44.
37. Shirazi-Adl A, Ahmed AM, Shrivastava SC. Mechanical response of a lumbar motion segment in axial torque alone and combined with compression. Spine 1986;11:914-27.
38. Rohlmann A, Zander T, Schmidt H, et al. Analysis of the influence of disc degeneration onthe mechanical behaviour ofalumbar motion segment using the finite element method. J Biomech 2006;39:2484-90.
39. Schmidt H, Heuer F, Drumm J, et al. Application of a calibration method provides more realistic results for a finite element model of a lumbar spinal segment. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2007;22:377-84.
40. Noailly J, Lacroix D, Planell JA. Finite element study of a novel intervertebral disc substitute. Spine 2005;30:2257-64.
41. Frei H, Oxland TR, Rathonyi GC, et al. The effect of nucleotomy on lumbar spine mechanics in compression and shear loading. Spine 2001;26:2080-9.
42. Yamamoto I, Panjabi MM, Crisco T, et al. Three-dimensional movements of the whole lumbar spine and lumbosacral joint. Spine 1989;14:1256-60.
43. Mimura M, Panjabi MM, Oxland TR, et al. Disc degeneration affects the multidirectional flexibility of the lumbar spine. Spine 1994;19:1371-80.
44. Panjabi MM, Oxland TR, Yamamoto I, et al. Mechanical behavior of the human lumbar and lumbosacral spine as shown by three-dimensional loaddisplacement curves. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1994;76:413-24.
45. Fujiwara A, Lim TH, An HS, et al. The effect of disc degeneration and facet joint osteoarthritis on the segmental flexibility of the lumbar spine. Spine 2000;25:3036-44.
46. Schmoelz W, Huber JF, Nydegger T, et al. Dynamic stabilization of the lumbar spine and its effects on adjacent segments: an in vitro experiment. J Spinal Disord Tech 2003;16:418-23.
47. Bergström JS, Rimnac CM, Kurtz SM. Prediction of multiaxial mechanical behavior for conventional and highly crosslinked UHMWPE using a hybrid constitutive model. Biomaterials 2003;24:1365-80.
48. Kurtz SM, Edidin AA, Bartel DL. The role of backside polishing, cup angle, and polyethylene thickness on the contact stresses in metal-backed acetabular components. J Biomech 1997;30:639-42.
49. Nagaraja S, Couse TL, Guldberg RE. Trabecular bone microdamage and microstructural stresses under uniaxial compression. J Biomech 2005;38: 707-16.
50. Weinans H, Sumner DR, Igloria R, et al. Sensitivity of periprosthetic stressshielding to load and the bone density-modulus relationship in subjectspecific finite element models. J Biomech 2000;33:809-17.
51. Kerner J, Huiskes R, van Lenthe GH, et al. Correlation between pre-operative periprosthetic bone density and post-operative bone loss in THA can be explained by strain-adaptive remodelling. J Biomech 1999;32:695-703.
52. White AA, Panjabi MM. Clinical Biomechanics of the Spine. 2nd ed. Philadelphia-Toronto: Lippincott; 1990.
53. Dooris AP, Goel VK, Grosland NM, et al. Load-sharing between anterior and posterior elements in a lumbar motion segment implanted with an artificial disc. Spine 2001;26:E122-9.
54. Siepe CJ, Wiechert K, Khattab MF, et al. Total lumbar disc replacement in athletes: clinical results, return to sport and athletic performance. Eur Spine J 2007;16:1001-13.
55. Mulholland RC. The mythof lumbar instability: the importance of abnormal loading as a cause of low back pain. Eur Spine J 2008;17:619-25.
56. Kim DH, Ryu KS, Kim MK, et al. Factors influencing segmental range of motion after lumbar total disc replacement using the ProDisc II prosthesis. J Neurosurg Spine 2007;7:131-8.
57. McAfee PC, Cunningham BW, Hayes V, et al. Biomechanical analysis of rotational motions after disc arthroplasty: implications for patients with adult deformities. Spine 2006;31:S152-60.
58. Noailly J, Wilke HJ, Planell JA, et al. How does the geometry affect the internal biomechanics of a lumbar spine bi-segment finite element model? Consequences on the validation process. J Biomech 2007;40: 2414-25.