Biomechanical effects of a titanium intervertebral cage as a stand-alone device, and in combination with locking plates in the canine caudal cervical spine

Mapping Subchondral Bone Density Distribution in the Canine C6-C7 Vertebral Endplates: A CT-OAM Study

Intervertebral cage subsidence is a common complication in treating disc-associated cervical spondylomyelopathy in dogs. The mechanical stability of the vertebral endplate in contact with the cage is crucial to preventing subsidence. This study aims to assess subchondral bone mineral density (sBMD) in the canine vertebral endplate (specifically, the C6-C7 vertebral motion unit) as a measure of its mechanical stability. The sBMD distribution was mapped for the C6 caudal and C7 cranial vertebral endplates in 15 middle- to large-breed dogs using computed tomography osteoabsorptiometry. The sBMD distribution in the canine C6 and C7 vertebral endplates exhibited a heterogeneous pattern, with lower density observed in the central and dorsal contact areas of the nucleus pulposus, where common subsidence occurs. Our results suggest a potential need to redesign intervertebral cages to ensure that contact areas align with regions of higher bone density. A broad-based design extending toward the lateral and dorsal aspects of the annulus fibrosus contact area may enhance stability.

Comparison of Cervical Stabilization with Transpedicular Pins and Polymethylmethacrylate versus Transvertebral Body Polyaxial Screws with or without an Interbody Distractor in Dogs

OBJECTIVE

 The main aim of this study was to compare the biomechanical properties of caudal cervical vertebral stabilization using bicortical transpedicular pins with polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) versus transvertebral body polyaxial screws and connecting rods with or without an interbody distractor.

STUDY DESIGN

 Ten canine cervical vertebral columns (C2-T3) were used. Four models (intact, transvertebral body polyaxial screw with interbody distractor [polyaxial + distractor], transvertebral body polyaxial screw without interbody distractor [polyaxial - distractor] and bicortical transpedicular pins/polymethylmethacrylate [pin-PMMA]) were applied to C6-7 sequentially on the same specimens. Angular range of motion (AROM) in the form of flexion and extension was measured at C4-5, C5-6 and C6-7 in all groups.

RESULTS

 Treated vertebral specimens had significantly less AROM than unaltered specimens. There was no significant difference in AROM between the experimental groups at C6 and C7. Angular range of motion ratio in flexion-extension was 80.8, 72.7 and 78.3% for polyaxial + distractor, polyaxial - distractor and pin-PMMA groups, respectively, which were less than the intact group. There was no significant increase in the range of motion of the adjacent vertebrae after stabilization.

CONCLUSION

 Stabilization obtained with transvertebral body polyaxial screws was comparable to that from the well-established bicortical pins/PMMA construct. Association of an intervertebral distractor did not change AROM of the polyaxial screw constructs.

Biomechanical effects of a titanium intervertebral cage as a stand-alone device, and in combination with locking plates in the canine caudal cervical spine

Objective

To evaluate the change in ex vivo biomechanical properties of the canine cervical spine, due to an intervertebral cage, both as a stand‐alone device and in combination with plates.

Study Design

Experimental ex vivo study.

Animals

Cervical spinal segments (C5‐C7) from eight canine cadavers.

Methods

The range of motion (ROM) and elastic zone stiffness (EZS) of the spines were determined with a four‐point bending device in flexion/extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation for four conditions: native, discectomy, cage (at C6‐C7), and cage with plates (at C6‐C7). The disc height index (DHI) for each condition was determined using radiography.

Results

Discectomy resulted in overall increased ROM (p < .01) and EZS (p < .05) and decreased DHI (p < .005) when compared to the native condition. Placement of the cage increased DHI (p < .001) and restored total ROM during flexion/extension, lateral bending and axial rotation, and EZS during flexion/extension to the level of the native spine. Application of the plates further reduced the total ROM during flexion/extension (p < .001) and lateral bending (p < .001), but restored ROM in extension and EZS during lateral bending. No implant failure, subsidence, or significant cage migration occurred during loading.

Conclusion

An anchorless intervertebral cage used as a stand‐alone device was able to restore the disc height and spinal stability to the level of the native cervical spine, whereas the addition of plates further reduced the spinal unit mobility.

Clinical Significance

This study implies that the intervertebral cage may be used as a stand‐alone device in the spinal unit fixation in the canine cervical spine.