An Experimental Study of a Combination Method Using a Pedicle Screw and Laminar Hook for the Osteoporotic Spine

Study Design. Using human cadaver spines, the authors compared the effect of using a combination of pedicle screw and laminar hook on the same vertebra with that of using a pedicle screw alone in reference to bone mineral density of the vertebra under nondestructive cyclic loading. Objectives. To quantify stiffness obtained by pedicle screw alone and by the combination method and to clarify a relationship between stiffness obtained by each instrumentation method and bone mineral density of the vertebra. Summary of Background Data. The use of pedicle screws apparently improves the union rate of spinal fusion. Instrumentation failures sometimes occur, however, such as loosening or loss of correction of the spine, especially in patients with osteoporosis. Some augmentation method in instrumentation is necessary to overcome bone fragility in the osteoporotic spine. Methods. Thirteen cadaver lumbar vertebrae were used for this study. Bone mineral density was measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometer. After separating each vertebrae, the pedicle screw was screwed into a vertebra. Five cycles of cephalocaudal loading were performed to the shank of the screw with a cross-head speed of 3 mm/min under a maximum load control of 29.4 N using an Instron type testing machine, and the stiffness obtained with the pedicle screw (Kj) was calculated from the load-deformation curve. Then, a laminar hook was set and connected to the screw via a rod. Mechanical testing was performed in the same way, and the stiffness obtained with the combination method (Kf) was determined. Kj and Kf were compared using the paired t test. The relationship between Kj, Kf, or the stiffness improvement ratio ([Kf − Kj]/Kj) by the combination method and bone mineral density was analyzed by linear regression analysis. Results. Stiffness obtained by the combination method was significantly greater than that obtained by pedicle screw alone (89.8 ± 35.0 N/mm by the combination method, 60.2 ± 19.6 N/mm by pedicle screwing alone; P < 0.0001). Stiffness, whether obtained by pedicle screw alone or by the combination method, was positively correlated with bone mineral density (with pedicle screw alone, R2 = 0.614, P < 0.0001; with the combination method, R2 = 0.645, P < 0.0001). However, there was no significant correlation between stiffness improvement ratio and bone mineral density. Conclusion. Instrumentation stiffness obtained by the combination method was significantly greater than that obtained by the use of pedicle screw alone. There was no significant correlation between the improvement ratio by the combination method and bone mineral density. These results suggest that the combination method is valuable irrespective of the presence of spinal osteoporosis.

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

[2]  J. Weinstein,et al.  Spinal Pedicle Fixation: Reliability and Validity of Roentgenogram-Based Assessment and Surgical Factors on Successful Screw Placement , 1988, Spine.

[3]  P. McAfee,et al.  Influence of Bone Mineral Density on the Fixation of Thoracolumbar Implants A Comparative Study of Transpedicular Screws, Laminar Hooks, and Spinous Process Wires , 1990, Spine.

[4]  K. Murota,et al.  An Experimental Study on Transpedicular Screw Fixation in Relation to Osteoporosis of the Lumbar Spine , 1991, Spine.

[5]  R. Biscup,et al.  Segmental spine plates with pedicle screw fixation. A new internal fixation device for disorders of the lumbar and thoracolumbar spine. , 1986, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[6]  K Okuyama,et al.  Stability of transpedicle screwing for the osteoporotic spine. An in vitro study of the mechanical stability. , 1993, Spine.

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

[8]  H. Takahashi,et al.  Failure characteristics of osteoporotic vertebral bodies monitored by acoustic emission. , 1993, Spine.

[9]  D N Kunz,et al.  Pedicle Screw Pullout Strength: Correlation with Insertional Torque , 1993, Spine.

[10]  Tait S. Smith,et al.  Short-segment Pedicle Instrumentation: Biomechanical Analysis of Supplemental Hook Fixation , 1996, Spine.

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

[12]  R Roy-Camille,et al.  Internal fixation of the lumbar spine with pedicle screw plating. , 1986, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[13]  R. Roy-Camille,et al.  [Osteosynthesis of dorsal, lumbar, and lumbosacral spine with metallic plates screwed into vertebral pedicles and articular apophyses]. , 1970, La Presse medicale.

[14]  J. Corin,et al.  Biomechanical Analysis of Pedicle Screw Instrumentation Systems in a Corpectomy Model , 1989, Spine.

[15]  M. Asher,et al.  The Strength and Stiffness of Thoracic Implant Anchors in Osteoporotic Spines , 1994, Spine.

[16]  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.

[17]  M. Yahiro Comprehensive literature review. Pedicle screw fixation devices. , 1994, Spine.

[18]  Howard S. An,et al.  Prediction of Fatigue Screw Loosening in Anterior Spinal Fixation using Dual Energy X‐ray Absorptiometry , 1995, Spine.

[19]  T. Tamaki,et al.  Mechanical Stability of the Pedicle Screw Fixation Systems for the Lumbar Spine , 1992, Spine.

[20]  J. Corin,et al.  MECHANICAL TESTING OF SPINAL INSTRUMENTATION , 1988, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[21]  D. E. Swartz,et al.  Importance of bone mineral density in instrumented spine fusions. , 1991, Spine.