Internal spinal fixator stiffness has only a minor influence on stresses in the adjacent discs.

STUDY DESIGN Stresses in vertebral endplates and discs were calculated using the three-dimensional nonlinear finite-element model of a lumbar spine with an internal spinal fixation device. OBJECTIVE To determine the influence of fixator stiffness on stresses in the adjacent discs. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA There are few computer models of the lumbar spine with a fixator. Most of these models neglect the muscle forces. Fixator stiffness is assumed to influence greatly the stresses in the adjacent discs. METHODS Two three-dimensional nonlinear finite-element models were used to determine stresses in the lumbar spine for standing and 60 degrees flexion of the upper body. One model had an internal spinal fixator, the other did not. In a parameter study, the diameters of the longitudinal rod of the fixator were assumed to be 3, 5, 7, and 10 mm. In the computer model, the forces of the trunk muscles were simulated. RESULTS The diameter of the longitudinal rod strongly affected the fixator loads but hardly influenced the stresses in the vertebral endplates. The stresses in the bridged discs were strongly reduced. However, the internal fixator had only a minor influence on the stresses in the anulus fibrosus and the pressure in the nucleus pulposus of the adjacent discs. CONCLUSIONS The stiffness of an internal spinal fixation device has only a minor influence on stresses in the adjacent discs.

[1]  C. Dickman,et al.  A Historical Cohort Study of Pedicle Screw Fixation in Thoracic, Lumbar, and Sacral Spinal Fusions. , 1994, Spine.

[2]  N. Langrana,et al.  Role of Ligaments and Facets in Lumbar Spinal Stability , 1995, Spine.

[3]  J W Frymoyer,et al.  An internal fixator for posterior application to short segments of the thoracic, lumbar, or lumbosacral spine. Design and testing. , 1986, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[4]  F Lavaste,et al.  Three-dimensional geometrical and mechanical modelling of the lumbar spine. , 1992, Journal of biomechanics.

[5]  M. Aebi,et al.  A New Technique for Measuring Lumbar Segmental Motion In Vivo: Method, Accuracy, and Preliminary Results , 1997, Spine.

[6]  Y. E. Kim,et al.  An Analytical Investigation of the Mechanics of Spinal Instrumentation , 1988, Spine.

[7]  M. Panjabi,et al.  Effects of Disc Injury on Mechanical Behavior of the Human Spine , 1984, Spine.

[8]  A. Vaccaro,et al.  Internal Fixation (Pedicle Screw Fixation) for Fusions of the Lumbar Spine , 1995, Spine.

[9]  M. Krag,et al.  Repair of failed transpedicle screw fixation. A biomechanical study comparing polymethylmethacrylate, milled bone, and matchstick bone reconstruction. , 1994, Spine.

[10]  P. Brinckmann,et al.  Interlaminar Shear Stresses and Laminae Separation in a Disc: Finite Element Analysis of the L3‐L4 Motion Segment Subjected to Axial Compressive Loads , 1995, Spine.

[11]  A Shirazi-Adl,et al.  A finite element study of a lumbar motion segment subjected to pure sagittal plane moments. , 1986, Journal of biomechanics.

[12]  B. T. Field,et al.  A biomechanical study of intrapeduncular screw fixation in the lumbosacral spine. , 1986, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[13]  Antonius Rohlmann,et al.  Telemeterized Load Measurement Using Instrumented spinal Internal Fixators in a Patient With Degenerative Instability , 1995, Spine.

[14]  J. K. Mayfield,et al.  The Effects of Pedicle Screw Fit: An In Vitro Study , 1994, Spine.

[15]  M. Yahiro.  Review of the "Historical Cohort Study of Pedicle Screw Fixation in Thoracic, Lumbar, and Sacral Spinal Fusions" report. , 1994, Spine.

[16]  J. O'Brien,et al.  Simultaneous Combined Anterior and Posterior Fusion, An Independent Analysis of A Treatment for the Disabled Low‐Back Pain Patient , 1990, Spine.