Potential contribution of pedicle screw design to loosening rate in patients with degenerative diseases of the lumbar spine: An observational study

BACKGROUND The majority of published data report the results of biomechanical tests of various design pedicle screw performance. The clinical relevance and relative contribution of screw design to instrumentation stability have been insufficiently studied. AIM To estimate the contribution of screw design to rate of pedicle screw loosening in patients with degenerative diseases of the lumbar spine. METHODS This study is a prospective evaluation of 175 patients with degenerative diseases and instability of the lumbar spine segments. Participants underwent spinal instrumentation employing pedicle screws with posterior only or transforaminal interbody fusion. Follow-up was for 18 mo. Patients with signs of pedicle screw loosening on computed tomography were registered; logistic regression analysis was used to identify the factors that influenced the rate of loosening. RESULTS Parameters included in the analysis were screw geometry, type of thread, external and internal screw diameter and helical pitch, bone density in Hounsfield units, number of levels fused, instrumentation without anterior support, laminectomy, and unilateral and bilateral total facet joint resection. The rate of screw loosening decreased with the increment in outer diameter, decrease in core diameter and helical pitch. The rate of screw loosening correlated positively with the number of fused levels and decreasing bone density. Bilateral facet joint removal significantly favored pedicle screw loosening. The influence of other factors was insignificant. CONCLUSION Screw parameters had a significant impact on the loosening rate along with bone quality characteristics, the number of levels fused and the extensiveness of decompression. The significance of the influence of screw parameters was comparable to those of patient- and surgery-related factors. Pedicle screw loosening was influenced by helical pitch, inner and outer diameter, but screw geometry and thread type were insignificant factors.

[1]  O. Danisa,et al.  Measurement Techniques and Utility of Hounsfield Unit Values for Assessment of Bone Quality Prior to Spinal Instrumentation: A Review of Current Literature , 2019, Spine.

[2]  J. Biswas,et al.  Design factors of lumbar pedicle screws under bending load: A finite element analysis , 2019, Biocybernetics and Biomedical Engineering.

[3]  Brent L. Showalter,et al.  Mechanical performance of lumbar intervertebral body fusion devices: An analysis of data submitted to the Food and Drug Administration. , 2018, Journal of biomechanics.

[4]  Keitaro Matsukawa,et al.  Regional Hounsfield unit measurement of screw trajectory for predicting pedicle screw fixation using cortical bone trajectory: a retrospective cohort study , 2018, Acta Neurochirurgica.

[5]  Glen L Niebur,et al.  Intraoperative biomechanics of lumbar pedicle screw loosening following successful arthrodesis , 2016, bioRxiv.

[6]  N. Hosogane,et al.  Comparison of Pedicle Screw Fixation Strength Among Different Transpedicular Trajectories: A Finite Element Study , 2015, Clinical spine surgery.

[7]  C. Aubin,et al.  Minimizing Pedicle Screw Pullout Risks: A Detailed Biomechanical Analysis of Screw Design and Placement , 2014, Clinical spine surgery.

[8]  T. Inaba,et al.  Biomechanical study of rotational micromovement of the pedicle screw , 2016, SpringerPlus.

[9]  M. Scheyerer,et al.  Predictive validity of preoperative CT scans and the risk of pedicle screw loosening in spinal surgery , 2016, Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery.

[10]  Yong-sook Park,et al.  The Effects of Spinopelvic Parameters and Paraspinal Muscle Degeneration on S1 Screw Loosening , 2015, Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society.

[11]  H. Wilke,et al.  Pedicle screw loosening: a clinically relevant complication? , 2015, European Spine Journal.

[12]  G. Kumar,et al.  Pull out strength of pedicle screw in normal and osteoporotic cancellous bone models , 2014, 2014 IEEE Conference on Biomedical Engineering and Sciences (IECBES).

[13]  I. Kingma,et al.  Single level lumbar laminectomy alters segmental biomechanical behavior without affecting adjacent segments. , 2014, Clinical biomechanics.

[14]  G. Huber,et al.  Influence of the screw augmentation technique and a diameter increase on pedicle screw fixation in the osteoporotic spine: pullout versus fatigue testing , 2014, European Spine Journal.

[15]  C. Zimmer,et al.  Bone Mineral Density Values Derived from Routine Lumbar Spine Multidetector Row CT Predict Osteoporotic Vertebral Fractures and Screw Loosening , 2014, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[16]  William E Lee,et al.  Designs and Techniques That Improve the Pullout Strength of Pedicle Screws in Osteoporotic Vertebrae: Current Status , 2014, BioMed research international.

[17]  Young-Yul Kim,et al.  Assessment of pedicle screw pullout strength based on various screw designs and bone densities-an ex vivo biomechanical study. , 2012, The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society.

[18]  Yang Zhang,et al.  A comparative study on screw loosening in osteoporotic lumbar spine fusion between expandable and conventional pedicle screws , 2012, Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery.

[19]  P. Anderson,et al.  Hounsfield units for assessing bone mineral density and strength: a tool for osteoporosis management. , 2011, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[20]  S. Cho,et al.  The biomechanics of pedicle screw-based instrumentation. , 2010, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[21]  D. Groos,et al.  Mid-range outcomes in 64 consecutive cases of multilevel fusion for degenerative diseases of the lumbar spine , 2010, Orthopedic reviews.

[22]  T. Lu,et al.  Comparison and prediction of pullout strength of conical and cylindrical pedicle screws within synthetic bone , 2009, BMC musculoskeletal disorders.

[23]  Ching-Kong Chao,et al.  Increasing Bending Strength and Pullout Strength in Conical Pedicle Screws: Biomechanical Tests and Finite Element Analyses , 2008, Journal of spinal disorders & techniques.

[24]  Giuseppe Guglielmi,et al.  Lumbar intervertebral instability: a review. , 2007, Radiology.

[25]  L. Claes,et al.  IN VITRO STUDY OF BIOMECHANICAL BEHAVIOR OF ANTERIOR AND TRANSFORAMINAL LUMBAR INTERBODY INSTRUMENTATION TECHNIQUES , 2006, Neurosurgery.

[26]  J. Willerson,et al.  LABORATORY INVESTIGATION , 2005 .

[27]  E. Teo,et al.  Effects of laminectomy and facetectomy on the stability of the lumbar motion segment. , 2004, Medical engineering & physics.

[28]  T. Washio,et al.  Fracture risk during pedicle screw insertion in osteoporotic spine. , 1998, Journal of spinal disorders.