Hybrid multidirectional test method to evaluate spinal adjacent-level effects.

BACKGROUND Several clinical studies have documented long-term adjacent-level effects of spinal fusion, due to stress concentration and motion loss at the fused segment. Non-fusion motion preservation devices are designed to eliminate or slow down such adverse effects. Therefore, appropriate biomechanical evaluation of the adjacent-level effects in spine is important and timely. Although many biomechanical studies are available and have provided some understanding of the adjacent-level effects, results have large variation and are conflicting, mostly due to the use of inappropriate and ill-defined methods. A new test method especially designed to study spinal adjacent-level effects is needed. METHODS The proposed Hybrid method uses unconstrained pure moment to provide rotation-input for multi-directional testing. The new method has four steps: (1) Intact spine specimen with entire mobile region is used. The specimen is prepared to measure various biomechanical parameters, e.g., disc pressures, ligament strains, and facet loads. (2) Appropriate unconstrained pure moment is applied to the intact specimen and total range of motion is determined. (3) Unconstrained pure moment is applied to the spinal construct (specimen with an implant) until the total range of motion of the construct equals that of the intact. (4) Statistical comparison of the biomechanical parameters between the construct and intact quantifies the adjacent-level effects. FINDINGS The uniqueness of the proposed method, to study the adjacent level effects due to fusion and non-fusion devices, is that it applies the needed rotation-input to the spine specimen, using available methodology with minimal modification. INTERPRETATION Previous studies have lacked appropriate and well-defined methodologies to evaluate spinal adjacent-level effects. The proposed method uses well-known methodology and yields high quality, and laboratory-independent results for the fusion and non-fusion devices.

[1]  A. Hilibrand,et al.  Radiculopathy and myelopathy at segments adjacent to the site of a previous anterior cervical arthrodesis. , 1999, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[2]  Y K Liu,et al.  Mechanical Properties of Lumbar Spinal Motion Segments as Affected by Partial Disc Removal , 1986, Spine.

[3]  M M Panjabi,et al.  Biomechanical Evaluation of Spinal Fixation Devices: II. Stability Provided by Eight Internal Fixation Devices , 1988, Spine.

[4]  J. Kellgren,et al.  Osteo-arthrosis and Disk Degeneration in an Urban Population * , 1958, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[5]  J. Cholewicki,et al.  Capsular ligament stretches during in vitro whiplash simulations. , 1998, Journal of spinal disorders.

[6]  Manabu Ito,et al.  In vitro biomechanical effects of reconstruction on adjacent motion segment: comparison of aligned/kyphotic posterolateral fusion with aligned posterior lumbar interbody fusion/posterolateral fusion. , 2003, Journal of neurosurgery.

[7]  B. Cunningham,et al.  The Effect of Spinal Destabilization and Instrumentation on Lumbar Intradiscal Pressure: An In Vitro Biomechanical Analysis , 1997, Spine.

[8]  Raj D. Rao,et al.  Does Anterior Plating of the Cervical Spine Predispose to Adjacent Segment Changes? , 2005, Spine.

[9]  R. Brand,et al.  Three-dimensional flexibility and stiffness properties of the human thoracic spine. , 1976, Journal of biomechanics.

[10]  M M Panjabi,et al.  Axes of motion of thoracolumbar burst fractures. , 1994, Journal of spinal disorders.

[11]  Rolando Garcia,et al.  Artificial intervertebral discs and beyond: a North American Spine Society Annual Meeting symposium. , 2002, The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society.

[12]  Bryan W Cunningham,et al.  SB Charité disc replacement: report of 60 prospective randomized cases in a US center. , 2003, Journal of spinal disorders & techniques.

[13]  L. Lunsford,et al.  Anterior surgery for cervical disc disease. Part 1: Treatment of lateral cervical disc herniation in 253 cases. , 1980, Journal of neurosurgery.

[14]  Minns Rj,et al.  Preliminary design and experimental studies of a novel soft implant for correcting sagittal plane instability in the lumbar spine. , 1997 .

[15]  G. Buttermann,et al.  Stiffness of prosthetic nucleus determines stiffness of reconstructed lumbar calf disc. , 2004, The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society.

[16]  Werner Schmoelz,et al.  Dynamic Stabilization of the Lumbar Spine and Its Effects on Adjacent Segments: An In Vitro Experiment , 2003 .

[17]  Edward Teng,et al.  Hybrid Testing of Lumbar CHARITÉ Discs Versus Fusions , 2007, Spine.

[18]  Manohar M. Panjabi,et al.  The effects of pedicle screw adjustments on the anatomical reduction of thoracolumbar burst fractures , 2001, European spine journal.

[19]  Helmut D. Link,et al.  History, design and biomechanics of the LINK SB Charité artificial disc , 2002, European Spine Journal.

[20]  Manohar M. Panjabi,et al.  Development of a System for In Vitro Neck Muscle Force Replication in Whole Cervical Spine Experiments , 2001, Spine.

[21]  CASEY K. LEE,et al.  Accelerated Degeneration of the Segment Adjacent to a Lumbar Fusion , 1988, Spine.

[22]  M Arand,et al.  Combined anteroposterior spinal fixation provides superior stabilisation to a single anterior or posterior procedure. , 2001, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[23]  M. Panjabi,et al.  Thoracolumbar burst fracture. A biomechanical investigation of its multidirectional flexibility. , 1994 .

[24]  C. D. Ray,et al.  Artificial Nucleus Replacement: Clinical Experience , 2002, Spine.

[25]  M M Panjabi,et al.  Loosening at the screw-vertebra junction in multilevel anterior cervical plate constructs. , 1999, Spine.

[26]  J L Lewis,et al.  Experimental measurement of ligament force, facet force, and segment motion in the human lumbar spine. , 1993, Journal of biomechanics.

[27]  Jung Song,et al.  In vitro biomechanics of cervical disc arthroplasty with the ProDisc-C total disc implant. , 2004, Neurosurgical focus.

[28]  J. Sénégas,et al.  Mechanical supplementation by non-rigid fixation in degenerative intervertebral lumbar segments: the Wallis system , 2002, European Spine Journal.

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

[30]  John H. Evans,et al.  Effects of Short Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion on Biomechanics of Neighboring Unfused Segments , 1996, Spine.

[31]  Thomas R. Oxland,et al.  Constrained Testing Conditions Affect the Axial Rotation Response of Lumbar Functional Spinal Units , 1998, Spine.

[32]  H. Wilke,et al.  Intradiscal pressure measurements in normal discs, compressed discs and compressed discs treated with axial posterior disc distraction: an experimental study on the rabbit lumbar spine model , 2006, European Spine Journal.

[33]  M. Panjabi,et al.  Biomechanical Evaluation of Lumbar Spinal Stability After Graded Facetectomies , 1990, Spine.

[34]  Manabu Ito,et al.  A Retrospective Radiographic Analysis of Subaxial Sagittal Alignment After Posterior C1–C2 Fusion , 2004, Spine.

[35]  Raj D. Rao,et al.  Biomechanical Changes at Adjacent Segments Following Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using Tapered Cages , 2005, Spine.

[36]  S. Yerby,et al.  The Effects of an Interspinous Implant on the Kinematics of the Instrumented and Adjacent Levels in the Lumbar Spine , 2003, Spine.

[37]  Jan Goffin,et al.  Preliminary clinical experience with the Bryan Cervical Disc Prosthesis , 2002 .

[38]  Thomas R. Oxland,et al.  Biomechanical characterization of the three-dimensional kinematic behaviour of the Dynesys dynamic stabilization system: an in vitro study , 2006, European Spine Journal.

[39]  Humphreys Sc,et al.  Adjacent-segment degeneration after lumbar fusion: a review of clinical, biomechanical, and radiologic studies. , 1999, American journal of orthopedics.

[40]  D T Davy,et al.  A Kinematic Study of the Cervical Spine Before and After Segmental Arthrodesis , 1998, Spine.

[41]  Manohar M. Panjabi,et al.  Clinical Biomechanics of the Spine , 1978 .

[42]  Jan Goffin,et al.  Long-Term Follow-Up After Interbody Fusion of the Cervical Spine , 2004, Journal of spinal disorders & techniques.

[43]  J W Frymoyer,et al.  A Comparison of Radiographic Findings in Fusion and Nonfusion Patients Ten or More Years Following Lumbar Disc Surgery , 1979, Spine.

[44]  Avinash G Patwardhan,et al.  Response of Charité total disc replacement under physiologic loads: prosthesis component motion patterns. , 2005, The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society.

[45]  Satoshi Nakamura,et al.  Biomechanical studies of an artificial disc implant in the human cadaveric spine. , 2005, Journal of neurosurgery. Spine.

[46]  A. Patwardhan,et al.  A follower load increases the load-carrying capacity of the lumbar spine in compression. , 1999, Spine.

[47]  Manabu Ito,et al.  Multidirectional flexibility analysis of cervical artificial disc reconstruction: in vitro human cadaveric spine model. , 2005, Journal of neurosurgery. Spine.

[48]  M M Panjabi,et al.  Biomechanical Evaluation of Spinal Fixation Devices: I. A Conceptual Framework , 1988, Spine.

[49]  Tae-Hong Lim,et al.  Biomechanical Study on the Effect of Cervical Spine Fusion on Adjacent-Level Intradiscal Pressure and Segmental Motion , 2002, Spine.

[50]  Thomas J Errico,et al.  Design and evaluation of the FlexiCore metal-on-metal intervertebral disc prosthesis. , 2004, The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society.

[51]  Richard D. Guyer,et al.  Intervertebral Disc Prostheses , 2003, Spine.

[52]  B. Strömqvist,et al.  The Spondylolytic Vertebra and Its Adjacent Segment: Mobility Measured Before and After Posterolateral Fusion , 1997, Spine.

[53]  D. Sengupta,et al.  Dynamic stabilization devices in the treatment of low back pain. , 2005, Neurology India.

[54]  Denis J. DiAngelo,et al.  Biomechanical Testing of an Artificial Cervical Joint and an Anterior Cervical Plate , 2003, Journal of spinal disorders & techniques.

[55]  Manohar M Panjabi,et al.  Effects of Charité Artificial Disc on the Implanted and Adjacent Spinal Segments Mechanics Using a Hybrid Testing Protocol , 2005, Spine.

[56]  J. Schlegel,et al.  Lumbar Motion Segment Pathology Adjacent to Thoracolumbar, Lumbar, and Lumbosacral Fusions , 1996, Spine.

[57]  Hyun Bae,et al.  ProDisc Artificial Total Lumbar Disc Replacement: Introduction and Early Results From the United States Clinical Trial , 2003, Spine.

[58]  Neil Duggal,et al.  Cervical total disc replacement, part two: clinical results. , 2005, The Orthopedic clinics of North America.

[59]  L. Claes,et al.  A universal spine tester for in vitro experiments with muscle force simulation , 2005, European Spine Journal.

[60]  Jacek Cholewicki,et al.  A Study of Stiffness Protocol as Exemplified by Testing of a Burst Fracture Model in Sagittal Plane , 2000, Spine.

[61]  S. L. Griffith,et al.  Intradiscal Pressure Measurements Above an Instrumented Fusion: A Cadaveric Study , 1995, Spine.

[62]  M. Panjabi,et al.  Physiologic Strains in the Lumbar Spinal Ligaments: An In VitroBiomechanical Study , 1982, Spine.

[63]  L. Claes,et al.  Testing criteria for spinal implants: recommendations for the standardization of in vitro stability testing of spinal implants , 1998, European Spine Journal.

[64]  K Kaneda,et al.  Stability of Posterior Spinal Instrumentation and Its Effects on Adjacent Motion Segments in the Lumbosacral Spine , 1998, Spine.

[65]  Manabu Ito,et al.  Artificial Intervertebral Disc Replacement Using Bioactive Three-Dimensional Fabric: Design, Development, and Preliminary Animal Study , 2002, Spine.

[66]  Bryan W Cunningham,et al.  Adjacent Level Intradiscal Pressure and Segmental Kinematics Following A Cervical Total Disc Arthroplasty: An In Vitro Human Cadaveric Model , 2005, Spine.