首页> 外文期刊>Spine >The stability of reconstruction methods after thoracolumbar total spondylectomy. An in vitro investigation.
【24h】

The stability of reconstruction methods after thoracolumbar total spondylectomy. An in vitro investigation.

机译:胸腰椎全脊椎切除术后重建方法的稳定性。体外调查。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

STUDY DESIGN: After total spondylectomy, five types of spinal reconstruction techniques were compared biomechanically. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the stability provided by five reconstruction methods after total spondylectomy. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Total spondylectomy presents a worst-case scenario for spinal reconstruction. However, few investigators have biomechanically investigated spinal reconstruction stability after total spondylectomy. METHODS: Eight human cadaveric spines (T11-L5) were used. After intact analysis, a total spondylectomy was performed at L2 and reconstructed using Harms titanium mesh (Depuy-Motech, Warsaw, IN) as an anterior strut. Anterior, posterior, or circumferential instrumentation techniques were then performed using the Kaneda SR and ISOLA pedicle screw systems (AcroMed Corp., Cleveland, OH) as follows: 1) anterior instrumentation at L1-L3 with multisegmental posterior instrumentation at T12-L4 (AMP), 2) anterior instrumentation at L1-L3 with short posterior instrumentation at L1-L3 (ASP), 3) anterior instrumentation at L1-L3 (A), 4) multilevel posterior instrumentation at T12-L4 (MP), and 5) short posterior instrumentation at L1-L3 (SP). Nondestructive biomechanical testing was performed under axial compression, flexion-extension, and lateral bending loading modes. RESULTS: Only circumferential instrumentation techniques (AMP, ASP) exhibited higher stiffness than the intact spine in all loading modes (P < 0.05). Short circumferential fixation provided more stability than did multilevel posterior instrumentation (P < 0.05). Multilevel posterior fixation provided more stiffness than did short posterior and anterior instrumentation alone (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Only circumferential fixation techniques provide more stability than the intact spine in all testing modes. Short circumferential instrumentation provides more stability than multilevel posterior instrumentation alone and requires fewer levels of spinal fusion.
机译:研究设计:在全脊椎切除术之后,对五种类型的脊柱重建技术进行了生物力学比较。目的:评估全脊椎切除术后五种重建方法提供的稳定性。背景资料摘要:全脊椎切除术是脊柱重建的最坏情况。但是,很少有研究者对全脊柱切除术后的脊柱重建稳定性进行生物力学研究。方法:使用八只人体尸体棘(T11-L5)。完整分析后,在L2进行全脊椎切除术,并使用Harms钛网片(Depuy-Motech,Warsaw,IN)作为前支重建。然后使用Kaneda SR和ISOLA椎弓根螺钉系统(AcroMed Corp.,Cleveland,OH)进行前,后或圆周器械技术,方法如下:1)在L1-L3进行前器械,在T12-L4(AMP)进行多节段后器械),2)L1-L3处的前部器械和L1-L3(ASP)处的短后路器械,3)L1-L3处的前部器械(A),4)T12-L4(MP)的多级后部器械L1-L3(SP)的短后路器械。在轴向压缩,屈伸和横向弯曲加载模式下进行了无损生物力学测试。结果:在所有负荷模式下,只有环行器械技术(AMP,ASP)显示出比完整脊柱更高的刚度(P <0.05)。短周向固定比多级后路固定提供了更高的稳定性(P <0.05)。与仅使用短后路和前路器械相比,多级后路固定提供了更大的刚度(P <0.05)。结论:在所有测试模式下,仅周向固定技术比完整脊柱提供更高的稳定性。短的周向器械比单独的多层后路器械提供更高的稳定性,并且所需的脊柱融合术水平更低。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号