Pure moment testing for spinal biomechanics applications: Fixed versus 3D floating ring cable-driven test designs

In-vitro 3D Analysis of Sacroiliac Joint Kinematics: Primary and Coupled Motions

STUDY DESIGN

An in-vitro biomechanical study of human cadaver sacroiliac joints.

OBJECTIVE

Our study aimed to develop a more comprehensive understanding of the native motion of the SIJ within the context of spinal kinematics and spinal implant evaluation.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Increasing attention has been given to the sacroiliac joint (SIJ) as a source of low back pain, despite its limited range of motion. We sought to characterize the rotational and translational motion in each axis utilizing standard pure moment flexion-extension (FE), lateral bending (LB), and axial rotation (AR) testing.

METHODS

Sixteen sacroiliac joints were evaluated from eight lumbosacral cadaver specimens (six females, two males) from subjects aged 28 to 57 years (mean age 46.8) with body mass index (BMI) 22 to 36 (mean BMI 30). Single leg stance was modeled by clamping the blocks on one ischium in a vise and letting the contralateral ischium hang freely. Pure moment loading was applied in FE, right/left AR, and right/left LB. Relative motions were collected with infrared markers.

RESULTS

The on-axis ratio was significantly lower in LB than in FE (P = 0.012) and in AR (P = 0.017). The rotation deviation angle measured 13.9 ± 9.1° in FE, 17.1 ± 8.7° in AR, and 35.7 ± 25.7° in LB. In LB the rotational deviation angle is significantly higher than both FE and AR (P = 0.003 and P = 0.011, respectively). In-plane translation was significantly higher (P = 0.005) in FE loading than in LB loading.

CONCLUSION

A nontrivial amount of rotation and translation occurred out of the expected axis of motion. The largest amount of off-axis rotation was observed in lateral bending. Relative to resultant translation, in-plane translation was lowest in lateral bending. Our results indicate that rotation of the SIJ is not fully described with the in-plane metrics which are normally reported in evaluation of fusion devices. Future studies of the SIJ may need to consider including off-axis rotation measurements when describing SIJ kinematics.Level of Evidence: 5.

Spine biomechanical testing methodologies: The controversy of consensus vs scientific evidence

Biomechanical testing methodologies for the spine have developed over the past 50 years. During that time, there have been several paradigm shifts with respect to techniques. These techniques evolved by incorporating state-of-the-art engineering principles, in vivo measurements, anatomical structure-function relationships, and the scientific method. Multiple parametric studies have focused on the effects that the experimental technique has on outcomes. As a result, testing methodologies have evolved, but there are no standard testing protocols, which makes the comparison of findings between experiments difficult and conclusions about in vivo performance challenging. In 2019, the international spine research community was surveyed to determine the consensus on spine biomechanical testing and if the consensus opinion was consistent with the scientific evidence. More than 80 responses to the survey were received. The findings of this survey confirmed that while some methods have been commonly adopted, not all are consistent with the scientific evidence. This review summarizes the scientific literature, the current consensus, and the authors' recommendations on best practices based on the compendium of available evidence.

Validation of a custom spine biomechanics simulator: A case for standardization

Mechanical testing machines used in cadaveric spine biomechanics research vary between labs. It is a necessary first step to understand the capabilities and limitations in any testing machine prior to publishing experimental data. In this study, a reproducible protocol that uses a synthetic spine was developed and used to quantify the inherent rotation error and the ability to apply loads in a single physiologic plane (pure-moment) of a custom spine biomechanics simulator. Rotation error was evaluated by comparing data collected by the test machine and the data collected by an optical motion capture system. Pure-moment loading was assessed by comparing the out-of-plane loads to the primary plane load. Using synthetic functional spine units previously shown to have mechanics similar to the cadaveric human spine, the simulator was evaluated using a dynamic test protocol reflective of its future use in the study of cadaveric spine specimens. Rotation errors inherent in the test machine were <0.25° compared to motion capture. Out of plane loads were <4.0% of the primary plane load, which confirmed pure-moment loading. The authors suggest that a standard validation protocol for biomechanical spine testing machines is needed for transparency and accurate field-wide data interpretation and comparison. We offer recommendations based on the reproducible use of a synthetic spinal specimen for consideration.

Novel posterior artificial atlanto-odontoid joint for atlantoaxial instability: a biomechanical study

OBJECTIVE Atlantoaxial instability is usually corrected by anterior and/or posterior C1-2 fusion. However, fusion can lead to considerable loss of movement at the C1-2 level, which can adversely impact a patient's quality of life. In this study, the authors investigated the stability and function of a novel posterior artificial atlanto-odontoid joint (NPAAJ) by using cadaveric cervical spines. METHODS The Oc-C7 regions from 10 cadaveric spines were used for anteroposterior (AP) translation and range of motion (ROM) tests while intact and after destabilization, NPAAJ implantation, and double-rod fixation. RESULTS The mean AP C1-2 translational distances in the intact, destabilization, and double-rod groups were 6.53 ± 1.07 mm, 11.54 ± 1.59 mm, and 3.24 ± 0.99 mm, respectively, and the AP translational distance in the NPAAJ group was significantly different from that in the intact group (p < 0.05). The AP translational distance in the NPAAJ group was not significantly different from that in the double-rod group (p = 0.24). The mean flexion, extension, and axial rotation ROM values of the NPAAJ group were 9.87° ± 0.91°, 8.75° ± 0.99°, and 61.93° ± 2.93°, respectively, and these were lower than the corresponding values in the intact group (p < 0.05). The mean lateral bending ROM in the NPAAJ group (9.26° ± 0.86°) was not significantly different from that in the intact group (p = 0.23), and the flexion, extension, and rotation ranges in the NPAAJ group were 79.5%, 85.2%, and 82.3%, respectively, of those in the intact group. CONCLUSIONS Use of NPAAJ for correction of atlantoaxial instability disorders caused by congenital odontoid dysplasia, odontoid fracture nonunion, and C-1 transverse ligament disruption (IA, IB, and IIB) may restore the stability and preserve most of the ROM of C1-2. Additionally, the NPAAJ may prevent soft tissue from embedding within the joint. However, additional studies should be performed before the NPAAJ is used clinically.

Biomechanical Evaluation of a Novel Integrated C1 Laminar Hook Combined with C1-C2 Transarticular Screws for Atlantoaxial Fusion: An In Vitro Human Cadaveric Study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the acute stability of a novel integrated C1 laminar hook (H) combined with a C1-C2 transarticular screw (TAS) with established techniques.

METHODS

A novel integrated C1 laminar hook was tested. Seven human cadaveric cervical spines (C0-C3) were used. The range of motion (ROM) of C1-C2 during flexion-extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation were recorded. The specimens were tested under the following conditions: intact, destabilized (using a type II odontoid fracture model), and destabilized but with internal fixation. The following screw systems were used: bilateral C1-C2 TAS combined with the Gallie (G) technique (TAS+G), C1-C2 TAS combined with a novel integrated C1 laminar hook (TAS+H), C1 lateral mass screw and C2 pedicle screws (C2PS+C1LMS), and novel integrated C1 laminar hook combined with C2 pedicle screws (C2PS+H). The TASs were always inserted after the C2PSs. The C2PS+C1LMS and C2PS+H tests were performed alternatively, as were the TAS+G and TAS+H tests.

RESULTS

All fixation constructs greatly improved acute atlantoaxial stability, with no significant difference among TAS+H, TAS+G, and C2PS+C1LMS (all P > 0.05). C2PS+H showed the greatest C1-C2 ROM in axial rotation, significantly different from TAS+G, C2PS+C1LMS, and TAS+H fixation models (all P < 0.05). However, there were no significant differences between C2PS+H and the other 3 models in flexion-extension and lateral bending (all P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The TAS+H technique can achieve acute stability comparable to that with the TAS+G technique for treating C1-C2 instability. The C2PS+H is a promising alternative, although it provides less stability in axial rotation than TAS+G, TAS+H, or C2PS+C1LMS.

A novel approach for biomechanical spine analysis: Mechanical response of vertebral bone augmentation by kyphoplasty to stabilise thoracolumbar burst fractures

Kyphoplasty has been shown as a well-established technique for spinal injuries. This technique allows a vertebral bone augmentation with a reduction of morbidity and does not involve any adjacent segment immobilisation. There is a lack of biomechanical information resulting in major gaps of knowledge such as: the evaluation of the "quality" of stabilisation provided by kyphoplasty as a standalone procedure in case of unstable fracture. Our objective is to analyse biomechanical response of spine segments stabilised by Kyphoplasty and PMMA cement after experiencing burst fractures. Six fresh-frozen cadaveric spine specimens constituted by five vertebra (T11-L3) and four disks were tested. A specific loading setup has been developed to impose pure moments corresponding to loadings of flexion-extension, lateral bending and axial rotation. Tests were performed on each specimen in an intact state and post kyphoplasty following a burst fracture. Strain measurements and motion variations of spinal unit are measured by a 3D optical method. Strain measurements on vertebral bodies after kyphoplasty shows a great primary stabilisation. Comparisons of mobility and angles variations between the intact and post kyphoplasty states do not highlight significant difference. Percutaneous kyphoplasty offers a good primary stability in case of burst fracture. Kinematics analysis during physiological movements shows that this stabilisation solution preserve disk mobility in each adjacent spinal unit.

New Posterior Atlantoaxial Restricted Non-Fusion Fixation for Atlantoaxial Instability: A Biomechanical Study

BACKGROUND

Loss of axial rotation and lateral bending after atlantoaxial fusion reduces a patient's quality of life. Therefore, effective, nonfusion fixation alternatives are needed for atlantoaxial instability.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the initial stability and function of posterior atlantoaxial restricted nonfusion fixation (PAARNF), a new protocol, using cadaveric cervical spines compared with the intact state, destabilization, and posterior C1-C2 rod fixation.

METHODS

Cervical areas C0 through C3 were used from 6 cadaveric spines to test flexion-extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation range of motion (ROM). With the use of a machine, 1.5-Nm torque at a rate of 0.1 Nm/s was used and held for 10 seconds. The specimens were loaded 3 times, and data were collected in the third cycle and tested in the following sequence: (1) intact, (2) destabilization (using a type II odontoid fracture model), (3) destabilization with PAARNF (PAARNF group), and (4) rod implantation (rod group). The order of tests for the PAARNF and rod groups was randomly assigned.

RESULTS

The average flexion-extension ROM in the PAARNF group was 7.44 ± 2.05°, which was significantly less than in the intact (P = .00) and destabilization (P = .00) groups but not significantly different from that of the rod group (P = .07). The average lateral bending ROM (10.59 ± 2.33°; P = .00) and axial rotation ROM (38.79 ± 13.41°; P = .00) of the PAARNF group were significantly greater than in the rod group. However, the values of the PAARNF group showed no significant differences compared with those of the intact group.

CONCLUSION

PAARNF restricted atlantoaxial flexion-extension but preserved axial rotation and lateral bending at the atlantoaxial joint in a type II odontoid fracture model. However, it should not be used clinically until further studies have been performed to test the long-term effects of this procedure.

An in vitro model of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis

STUDY DESIGN

A biomechanical human cadaveric study.

OBJECTIVE

To create a biomechanical model of low-grade degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS), defined by anterior listhesis, for future testing of spinal instrumentation.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Current spinal implants are used to treat a multitude of conditions that range from herniated discs to degenerative diseases. The optimal stiffness of these instrumentation systems for each specific spinal condition is unknown. Ex vivo models representing degenerative spinal conditions are scarce in the literature. A model of DLS for implant testing will enhance our understanding of implant-spine behavior for specific populations of patients.

METHODS

Four incremental surgical destabilizations were performed on 8 lumbar functional spinal units. The facet complex and intervertebral disc were targeted to represent the tissue changes associated with DLS. After each destabilization, the specimen was tested with: (1) applied shear force (-50 to 250 N) with a constant axial compression force (300 N) and (2) applied pure moments in flexion-extension, lateral bending and axial rotation (±5 Nm). Relative motion between the 2 vertebrae was tracked with a motion capture system. The effect of specimen condition on intervertebral motion was assessed for shear and flexibility testing.

RESULTS

Shear translation increased, specimen stiffness decreased and range of motion increased with specimen destabilization (P < 0.0002). A mean anterior translation of 3.1 mm (SD 1.1 mm) was achieved only after destabilization of both the facet complex and disc. Of the 5 specimen conditions, 3 were required to achieve grade 1 DLS: (1) intact, (3) a 4-mm facet gap, and (5) a combined nucleus and annulus injury.

CONCLUSION

Destabilization of both the facet complex and disc was required to achieve anterior listhesis of 3.1 mm consistent with a grade 1 DLS under an applied shear force of 250 N. Sufficient listhesis was measured without radical specimen resection. Important anatomical structures for supporting spinal instrumentation were preserved such that this model can be used in future to characterize behavior of novel instrumentation prior to clinical trials.