What is the Best Way to Optimize Thoracic Kyphosis Correction? A Micro-CT and Biomechanical Analysis of Pedicle Morphology and Screw Failure

Study Design. A human cadaveric biomechanical analysis. Objective. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the bone density/trabecular width of the thoracic pedicle and correlate that with its resistance against compressive loading used during correction maneuvers in the thoracic spine (i.e., cantilever bending). Summary of Background Data. As surgeons perform cantilever correction maneuvers in the spine, it is common to have pedicle screws pullout or displace while placing corrective forces on the construct. Currently, surgeons either compress against the cephalad aspect of the pedicle or vice versa. We set out to establish which aspect of the pedicle was the most dense and to determine the optimal direction for screw compression during kyphosis/deformity correction. Methods. Fifteen fresh-frozen cadaveric vertebrae (n = 15) were examined by micro–computed tomography to determine percent bone volume/total volume (%BV/TV) within the cephalad and caudad aspects of the pedicle. Specimens were sectioned in the sagittal plane. Pedicles were instrumented according to the straightforward trajectory on both sides. Specimens were then mounted and loading to failure was performed perpendicular to the screw axis (either the cephalad or the caudad aspect of the pedicle). Results. Mean failure when loading against the caudad aspect of the pedicle was statistically, significantly greater (454.5 ± 241.3 N vs. 334.79 1 ± 158.435 N) than for the cephalad pedicle (P < 0.001). In concordance with failure data, more trabecular and cortical bones were observed within the caudad half of the pedicle compared with the cephalad half (P < 0.001). Conclusion. Our results suggest that the caudad half of the pedicle is denser and withstands higher forces compared with the cephalad aspect. In turn, the incidence of intraoperative screw loosening and/or pedicle fracture may be reduced if the compressive forces (cantilever bending during deformity correction) placed upon the construct are applied against the caudad portion of the pedicle.

[1]  D. Sucato.  Management of Severe Spinal Deformity: Scoliosis and Kyphosis , 2010, Spine.

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

[3]  Stavros K. Kourkoulis,et al.  The Influence of the Insertion Technique on the Pullout Force of Pedicle Screws: An Experimental Study , 2010, Spine.

[4]  L. Lenke,et al.  Posterior Vertebral Column Resection for Severe Pediatric Deformity: Minimum Two-Year Follow-up of Thirty-Five Consecutive Patients , 2009, Spine.

[5]  F. D. de Paula,et al.  The Effect of Repetitive Pilot-Hole Use on the Insertion Torque and Pullout Strength of Vertebral System Screws , 2009, Spine.

[6]  H. Shufflebarger,et al.  The Ponte Procedure: Posterior Only Treatment of Scheuermann's Kyphosis Using Segmental Posterior Shortening and Pedicle Screw Instrumentation , 2007, Journal of spinal disorders & techniques.

[7]  F. Pfeiffer,et al.  A Comparison of Pullout Strength for Pedicle Screws of Different Designs: A Study Using Tapped and Untapped Pilot Holes , 2006, Spine.

[8]  L. Lenke,et al.  Anterior/Posterior Spinal Instrumentation Versus Posterior Instrumentation Alone for the Treatment of Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliotic Curves More Than 90° , 2006, Spine.

[9]  L. Lenke,et al.  Comparison of Scheuermann Kyphosis Correction by Posterior-Only Thoracic Pedicle Screw Fixation Versus Combined Anterior/Posterior Fusion , 2006, Spine.

[10]  Kao-Wha Chang,et al.  Cantilever Bending Technique for Treatment of Large and Rigid Scoliosis , 2003, Spine.

[11]  R. Lehman,et al.  Effect of Various Tapping Diameters on Insertion of Thoracic Pedicle Screws: A Biomechanical Analysis , 2003, Spine.

[12]  B. Cunningham,et al.  Straight-Forward Versus Anatomic Trajectory Technique of Thoracic Pedicle Screw Fixation: A Biomechanical Analysis , 2003, Spine.

[13]  Sang Min Lee,et al.  Posterior Vertebral Column Resection For Severe Spinal Deformities , 2002, Spine.

[14]  A. Valdevit,et al.  Characteristics of pullout failure in conical and cylindrical pedicle screws after full insertion and back-out. , 2001, The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society.

[15]  S. Cook,et al.  Effects of Bone Mineral Density on Pedicle Screw Fixation , 1994, Spine.

[16]  A. Tencer,et al.  Caudo-cephalad loading of pedicle screws: mechanisms of loosening and methods of augmentation. , 1993, Spine.

[17]  O. Boachie-Adjei,et al.  Vertebral column resection and arthrodesis for complex spinal deformities. , 1991, Journal of spinal disorders.

[18]  G. Speck,et al.  The surgical treatment of Scheuermann's kyphosis. , 1986, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

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

[20]  L. Micheli,et al.  Combined Anterior and Posterior Fusion for Scheuermann's Kyphosis , 1981, Spine.

[21]  D. Wenger,et al.  Surgical management of thoracic kyphosis in adolescents. , 1979, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[22]  R. Winter,et al.  Scheuermann's kyphosis. Results of surgical treatment by posterior spine arthrodesis in twenty-two patients. , 1975, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.