Biomechanical Evaluation of Intervertebral Fusion Process After Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Finite Element Study

Introduction: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is a widely accepted surgical procedure in the treatment of cervical radiculopathy and myelopathy. A solid interbody fusion is of critical significance in achieving satisfactory outcomes after ACDF. However, the current radiographic techniques to determine the degree of fusion are inaccurate and radiative. Several animal experiments suggested that the mechanical load on the spinal instrumentation could reflect the fusion process and evaluated the stability of implant. This study aims to investigate the biomechanical changes during the fusion process and explore the feasibility of reflecting the fusion status after ACDF through the load changes borne by the interbody fusion cage. Methods: The computed tomography (CT) scans preoperatively, immediately after surgery, at 3 months, and 6 months follow-up of patients who underwent ACDF at C5/6 were used to construct the C2–C7 finite element (FE) models representing different courses of fusion stages. A 75-N follower load with 1.0-Nm moments was applied to the top of C2 vertebra in the models to simulate flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation with the C7 vertebra fixed. The Von Mises stress at the surfaces of instrumentation and the adjacent intervertebral disc and force at the facet joints were analyzed. Results: The facet contact force at C5/6 suggested a significantly stepwise reduction as the fusion proceeded while the intradiscal pressure and facet contact force of adjacent levels changed slightly. The stress on the surfaces of titanium plate and screws significantly decreased at 3 and 6 months follow-up. A markedly changed stress distribution in extension among three models was noted in different fusion stages. After solid fusion is achieved, the stress was more uniformly distributed interbody fusion in all loading conditions. Conclusions: Through a follow-up study of 6 months, the stress on the surfaces of cervical instrumentation remarkably decreased in all loading conditions. After solid intervertebral fusion formed, the stress distributions on the surfaces of interbody cage and screws were more uniform. The stress distribution in extension altered significantly in different fusion status. Future studies are needed to develop the interbody fusion device with wireless sensors to achieve longitudinal real-time monitoring of the stress distribution during the course of fusion.

[1]  Mohammad Nikkhoo,et al.  Comparative biomechanical analysis of rigid vs. flexible fixation devices for the lumbar spine: A geometrically patient-specific poroelastic finite element study , 2021, Comput. Methods Programs Biomed..

[2]  Xin-feng Li,et al.  Impact of adjacent pre-existing disc degeneration status on its biomechanics after single-level anterior cervical interbody fusion , 2021, Comput. Methods Programs Biomed..

[3]  Zhe Lv,et al.  Biomechanical Analysis of Cervical Artificial Disc Replacement Using Cervical Subtotal Discectomy Prosthesis , 2021, Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology.

[4]  Tanguy Messager,et al.  A microstructure-based model for a full lamellar-interlamellar displacement and shear strain mapping inside human intervertebral disc core , 2021, Comput. Biol. Medicine.

[5]  Y. Meng,et al.  Change in the postoperative intervertebral space height and its impact on clinical and radiological outcomes after ACDF surgery using a zero-profile device: a single-Centre retrospective study of 138 cases , 2021, BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders.

[6]  Yuan Xue,et al.  Biomechanical Effect of C5/C6 Intervertebral Reconstructive Height on Adjacent Segments in Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion ‐ A Finite Element Analysis , 2021, Orthopaedic surgery.

[7]  Yuan Xue,et al.  Biomechanical effect of different plate-to-disc distance on surgical and adjacent segment in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion - a finite element analysis , 2021, BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders.

[8]  M. Nikkhoo,et al.  Biomechanical Investigation Between Rigid and Semirigid Posterolateral Fixation During Daily Activities: Geometrically Parametric Poroelastic Finite Element Analyses , 2021, Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology.

[9]  Won Man Park,et al.  Comparison of Extragraft Bone Formation after Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Using Simultaneous and Sequential Algorithms , 2021, Applied Sciences.

[10]  M. Nikkhoo,et al.  The Biomechanical Response of the Lower Cervical Spine Post Laminectomy: Geometrically-Parametric Patient-Specific Finite Element Analyses , 2020 .

[11]  Yanjun Liu,et al.  Is there a Relationship between Bony Fusion after Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion and Heterotopic Ossification after Cervical Disc Arthroplasty in Hybrid Surgery? , 2020, Spine.

[12]  W. Ding,et al.  Locking stand-alone cage versus anterior plate construct in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials , 2020, European Spine Journal.

[13]  Yanzheng Gao,et al.  Biomechanical Comparison of a New Memory Compression Alloy Plate versus Traditional Titanium Plate for Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Finite Element Analysis , 2020, BioMed research international.

[14]  N. Theodore Degenerative Cervical Spondylosis. , 2020, The New England journal of medicine.

[15]  N. Yoganandan,et al.  External and internal responses of cervical disc arthroplasty and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: A finite element modeling study. , 2020, Journal of the mechanical behavior of biomedical materials.

[16]  Li Li,et al.  Adjacent segment biomechanical changes after one- or two-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion using either a zero-profile device or cage plus plate: A finite element analysis , 2020, Comput. Biol. Medicine.

[17]  H.-L. Yin,et al.  Adjacent-level biomechanics after single-level anterior cervical interbody fusion with anchored zero-profile spacer versus cage-plate construct: a finite element study , 2020, BMC Surgery.

[18]  Brett S. Klosterhoff,et al.  Wireless sensor enables longitudinal monitoring of regenerative niche mechanics during rehabilitation that enhance bone repair. , 2020, Bone.

[19]  Li Li,et al.  Biomechanical evaluation of adjacent segment degeneration after one- or two-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion versus cervical disc arthroplasty: A finite element analysis , 2020, Comput. Methods Programs Biomed..

[20]  Nicole A. Kallemeyn,et al.  Biomechanical Analysis of the Cervical Spine Following Disc Degeneration, Disc Fusion, and Disc Replacement: A Finite Element Study , 2019, International Journal of Spine Surgery.

[21]  W. Park,et al.  Biomechanical investigation of extragraft bone formation influences on the operated motion segment after anterior cervical spinal discectomy and fusion , 2019, Scientific Reports.

[22]  F. Zaïri,et al.  Interlamellar-induced time-dependent response of disc annulus: A microstructure-based chemo-viscoelastic model. , 2019, Acta biomaterialia.

[23]  Y. Meng,et al.  Biomechanical effects on the intermediate segment of noncontiguous hybrid surgery with cervical disc arthroplasty and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a finite element analysis. , 2019, The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society.

[24]  Jaw-Lin Wang,et al.  Development and validation of a geometrically personalized finite element model of the lower ligamentous cervical spine for clinical applications , 2019, Comput. Biol. Medicine.

[25]  C. Vleggeert-Lankamp,et al.  Evaluation of bony fusion after anterior cervical discectomy: a systematic literature review , 2018, European Spine Journal.

[26]  Stuart Walker Repair , 2018, Design Realities.

[27]  J. Peterson,et al.  Stiffness Matters: Part II—The Effects of Plate Stiffness on Load-Sharing and the Progression of Fusion Following Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion In Vivo , 2018, Spine.

[28]  Eric H Ledet,et al.  Smart implants in orthopedic surgery, improving patient outcomes: a review , 2018, Innovation and entrepreneurship in health.

[29]  Brett S. Klosterhoff,et al.  Wireless implantable sensor for non-invasive, longitudinal quantification of axial strain across rodent long bone defects , 2017, bioRxiv.

[30]  Y. Meng,et al.  In vitro biomechanical comparison after fixed- and mobile-core artificial cervical disc replacement versus fusion , 2017, Medicine.

[31]  Y. Meng,et al.  The biomechanical impact of facet tropism on the intervertebral disc and facet joints in the cervical spine. , 2017, The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society.

[32]  Peng Liu,et al.  A new cervical artificial disc prosthesis based on physiological curvature of end plate: a finite element analysis. , 2016, The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society.

[33]  Kyungsoo Kim,et al.  Effect of mechanical loading on heterotopic ossification in cervical total disc replacement: a three-dimensional finite element analysis , 2016, Biomechanics and modeling in mechanobiology.

[34]  Yoon-Hyuk Kim,et al.  A Biomechanical Analysis of an Artificial Disc With a Shock-absorbing Core Property by Using Whole-cervical Spine Finite Element Analysis , 2016, Spine.

[35]  Feizhou Lyu,et al.  Can an Endplate‐conformed Cervical Cage Provide a Better Biomechanical Environment than a Typical Non‐conformed Cage? , 2016, Orthopaedic surgery.

[36]  M. Schwarze,et al.  In vitro investigation of a new dynamic cervical implant: comparison to spinal fusion and total disc replacement , 2016, European Spine Journal.

[37]  A. Crocombe,et al.  Numerical evaluation of bone remodelling associated with trans-femoral osseointegration implant--A 68 month follow-up study. , 2016, Journal of biomechanics.

[38]  W. Walsh,et al.  The design evolution of interbody cages in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a systematic review , 2015, BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders.

[39]  J. Simões,et al.  Failure analysis of C-5 after total disc replacement with ProDisc-C at 1 and 2 levels and in combination with a fusion cage: finite-element and biomechanical models. , 2015, Journal of neurosurgery. Spine.

[40]  Mohammad Wahid Ansari,et al.  The legal status of in vitro embryos , 2014 .

[41]  Kyungsoo Kim,et al.  Comparison of Cervical Spine Biomechanics After Fixed- and Mobile-Core Artificial Disc Replacement: A Finite Element Analysis , 2011, Spine.

[42]  R. Mulholland,et al.  The implications of stress patterns in the vertebral body under axial support of an artificial implant. , 2009, Medical engineering & physics.

[43]  W Skalli,et al.  Parametric and subject-specific finite element modelling of the lower cervical spine. Influence of geometrical parameters on the motion patterns. , 2009, Journal of biomechanics.

[44]  Fabio Galbusera,et al.  Anterior cervical fusion: a biomechanical comparison of 4 techniques. Laboratory investigation. , 2008, Journal of neurosurgery. Spine.

[45]  A. Fleischman,et al.  In Vivo Assessment of Bone Graft/Endplate Contact Pressure in a Caprine Interbody Pseudarthrosis Model: A Preliminary Biomechanical Characterization of the Fusion Process for the Development of a Microelectromechanical Systems (MEMS) Biosensor , 2008, SAS Journal.

[46]  A. Fleischman,et al.  A preliminary biomechanical evaluation in a simulated spinal fusion model. Laboratory investigation. , 2007, Journal of neurosurgery. Spine.

[47]  A. Minami,et al.  An Investigational Study on the Healing Process of Anterior Spinal Arthrodesis Using a Bioactive Ceramic Spacer and the Change in Load-Sharing of Spinal Instrumentation , 2005, Spine.

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

[49]  J. Cholewicki,et al.  Mechanical Properties of the Human Cervical Spine as Shown by Three-Dimensional Load–Displacement Curves , 2001, Spine.

[50]  T. H. Jansen,et al.  Anterior cervical plating reverses load transfer through multilevel strut-grafts. , 2000, Spine.

[51]  T. H. Jansen,et al.  The in vitro effects of instrumentation on multilevel cervical strut-graft mechanics. , 1999, Spine.

[52]  K. Kaneda,et al.  Maturation of the Posterolateral Spinal Fusion and Its Effect on Load-Sharing of Spinal Instrumentation. An In Vivo Sheep Model* , 1997, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[53]  K. Gill,et al.  Can lumbar spine radiographs accurately determine fusion in postoperative patients? Correlation of routine radiographs with a second surgical look at lumbar fusions. , 1993, Spine.

[54]  A. E. Brodsky,et al.  Correlation of Radiologic Assessment of Lumbar Spine Fusions with Surgical Exploration , 1991, Spine.

[55]  J. Walker,et al.  The controversy over radiation safety. A historical overview. , 1989, JAMA.

[56]  H. Sherk,et al.  The Vertical Stability of the Cervical Spine , 1988, Spine.

[57]  D. Irvine,et al.  PREVALENCE OF CERVICAL SPONDYLOSIS IN A GENERAL PRACTICE. , 1965, Lancet.

[58]  R. Robinson,et al.  The treatment of certain cervical-spine disorders by anterior removal of the intervertebral disc and interbody fusion. , 1958, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[59]  K. Foley,et al.  Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Single-level Anterior Cervical Arthrodesis: A Prospective Trial Comparing Allograft to a Reduced Dose of rhBMP-2 , 2017, Clinical spine surgery.

[60]  D. Ku,et al.  Biomechanical comparison between fusion of two vertebrae and implantation of an artificial intervertebral disc. , 2006, Journal of biomechanics.

[61]  E. Benzel,et al.  Cervical interbody fusion. , 2001, Journal of neurosurgery.