Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Stand-alone lumbar cage subsidence: A biomechanical sensitivity study of cage design and placement.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Spinal degeneration and instability are commonly treated with interbody fusion cages either alone or supplemented with posterior instrumentation with the aim to immobilise the segment and restore intervertebral height. The purpose of this work is to establish a tool which may help to understand the effects of intervertebral cage design and placement on the biomechanical response of a patient-specific model to help reducing post-surgical complications such as subsidence and segment instability.

METHODS: A 3D lumbar functional spinal unit (FSU) finite element model was created and a parametric model of an interbody cage was designed and introduced in the FSU. A Drucker-Prager Cap plasticity formulation was used to predict plastic strains and bone failure in the vertebrae. The effect of varying cage size, cross-sectional area, apparent stiffness and positioning was evaluated under 500 N preload followed by 7.5 Nm multidirectional rotation and the results were compared with the intact model.

RESULTS: The most influential cage parameters on the FSU were size, curvature congruence with the endplates and cage placement. Segmental stiffness was higher when increasing the cross-sectional cage area in all loading directions and when the cage was anteriorly placed in all directions but extension. In general, the facet joint forces were reduced by increasing segmental stiffness. However, these forces were higher than in the intact model in most of the cases due to the displacement of the instantaneous centre of rotation. The highest plastic deformations took place at the caudal vertebra under flexion and increased for cages with greater stiffness. Thus, wider cages and a more anteriorly placement would increase the volume of failed bone and, therefore, the risk of subsidence.

CONCLUSIONS: Cage geometry plays a crucial role in the success of lumbar surgery. General considerations such as larger cages may be applied as a guideline, but parameters such as curvature or cage placement should be determined for each specific patient. This model provides a proof-of-concept of a tool for the preoperative evaluation of lumbar surgical outcomes.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app