Biomechanical investigation of the hybrid modified cortical bone screw–pedicle screw fixation technique: Finite-element analysis

Hybrid cortical bone trajectory and modified cortical bone trajectory techniques in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion at L4-L5 segment: A finite element analysis

Background

The academia has increasingly acknowledged the superior biomechanical performance of the hybrid fixation technique in recent years. However, there is a lack of research on the hybrid fixation technique using BCS (Bilateral Cortical Screws) and BMCS (Bilateral Modified Cortical Screws). This study aims to investigate the biomechanical performance of the BCS and BMCS hybrid fixation technique in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) at the L4-L5 segment in a complete lumbar-sacral finite element model.

Methods

Three cadaver specimens are used to construct three lumbar-sacral finite element models. The biomechanical properties of various fixation technologies (BCS-BCS, BMCS-BMCS, BMCS-BCS, and BCS-BMCS) are evaluated at the L4-5 segment with a TLIF procedure conducted, including the range of motion (ROM) of the L4-5 segment, as well as the stress experienced by the cage, screws, and rods. The testing is conducted under specific loading conditions, including a compressive load of 400 N and a torque of 7.5Nm, subjecting the model to simulate flexion, extension, lateral bending, and rotation.

Results

No significant variations are seen in the ROM at the L4-5 segment when comparing the four fixation procedures during flexion and extension. However, when it comes to lateral bending and rotation, the ROM is ordered in descending order as BCS-BCS, BCS-BMCS, BMCS-BMCS, and BMCS-BCS. The maximum stress experienced by the cage is observed to be highest within the BMCS-BCS technique during movements including flexion, extension, and lateral bending. Conversely, the BMCS-BMCS technique exhibits the highest cage stress levels during rotational movements. The stress applies to the screws and rods order the sequence of BCS-BCS, BCS-BMCS, BMCS-BCS, and BMCS-BMCS throughout all four working conditions.

Conclusion

The BMCS-BCS technique shows better biomechanical performance with less ROM and lower stress on the internal fixation system compared to other fixation techniques. BMCS-BMCS technology has similar mechanical performance to BMCS-BCS but has more contact area between screws and cortical bone, making it better for patients with severe osteoporosis.

Hybrid pedicle screw and modified cortical bone trajectory technique in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion at L4-L5 segment: finite element analysis

BACKGROUND

Investigate the biomechanical properties of the hybrid fixation technique with bilateral pedicle screw (BPS) and bilateral modified cortical bone trajectory screw (BMCS) in L4-L5 transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF).

METHODS

 Three finite element (FE) models of the L1-S1 lumbar spine were established according to the three human cadaveric lumbar specimens. BPS-BMCS (BPS at L4 and BMCS at L5), BMCS-BPS (BMCS at L4 and BPS at L5), BPS-BPS (BPS at L4 and L5), and BMCS-BMCS (BMCS at L4 and L5) were implanted into the L4-L5 segment of each FE model. The range of motion (ROM) of the L4-L5 segment, von Mises stress of the fixation, intervertebral cage, and rod were compared under a 400-N compressive load with 7.5 Nm moments in flexion, extension, bending, and rotation.

RESULTS

 BPS-BMCS technique has the lowest ROM in extension and rotation, and BMCS-BMCS technique has the lowest ROM in flexion and lateral bending. The BMCS-BMCS technique showed maximal cage stress in flexion and lateral bending, and the BPS-BPS technique in extension and rotation. Compared to the BPS-BPS and BMCS-BMCS technique, BPS-BMCS technique presented a lower risk of screw breakage and BMCS-BPS technique presented a lower risk of rod breakage.

CONCLUSION

 The results of this study support that the use of the BPS-BMCS and BMCS-BPS techniques in TLIF surgery for offering the superior stability and a lower risk of cage subsidence and instrument-related complication.

Biomechanical comparative analysis of conventional pedicle screws and cortical bone trajectory fixation in the lumbar spine: An in vitro and finite element study

Numerous screw fixation systems have evolved in clinical practice as a result of advances in screw insertion technology. Currently, pedicle screw (PS) fixation technology is recognized as the gold standard of posterior lumbar fusion, but it can also have some negative complications, such as screw loosening, pullout, and breakage. To address these concerns, cortical bone trajectory (CBT) has been proposed and gradually developed. However, it is still unclear whether cortical bone trajectory can achieve similar mechanical stability to pedicle screw and whether the combination of pedicle screw + cortical bone trajectory fixation can provide a suitable mechanical environment in the intervertebral space. The present study aimed to investigate the biomechanical responses of the lumbar spine with pedicle screw and cortical bone trajectory fixation. Accordingly, finite element analysis (FEA) and in vitro specimen biomechanical experiment (IVE) were performed to analyze the stiffness, range of motion (ROM), and stress distribution of the lumbar spine with various combinations of pedicle screw and cortical bone trajectory screws under single-segment and dual-segment fixation. The results show that dual-segment fixation and hybrid screw placement can provide greater stiffness, which is beneficial for maintaining the biomechanical stability of the spine. Meanwhile, each segment's range of motion is reduced after fusion, and the loss of adjacent segments' range of motion is more obvious with longer fusion segments, thereby leading to adjacent-segment disease (ASD). Long-segment internal fixation can equalize total spinal stresses. Additionally, cortical bone trajectory screws perform better in terms of the rotation resistance of fusion segments, while pedicle screw screws perform better in terms of flexion-extension resistance, as well as lateral bending. Moreover, the maximum screw stress of L4 cortical bone trajectory/L5 pedicle screw is the highest, followed by L45 cortical bone trajectory. This biomechanical analysis can accordingly provide inspiration for the choice of intervertebral fusion strategy.

Comparison of CT values in traditional trajectory, traditional cortical bone trajectory, and modified cortical bone trajectory

BACKGROUND

To compare the CT values and length of the screw tracks of traditional trajectory (TT), cortical bone trajectory (CBT), and modified cortical bone trajectory (MCBT) screws and investigate the effects on the biomechanics of lumbar fixation.

METHODS

CT scan data of 60 L4 and L5 lumbar spine were retrieved and divided into 4 groups (10 male and 10 female cases in the 20-30 years old group and 20 male and 20 female cases in the 30-40 years old group). 3-dimentional (3D) model were established using Mimics 19.0 for each group and the placement of three techniques was simulated on the L4 and L5, and the part of the bone occupied by the screw track was set as the region of interest (ROI). The mean CT value and the actual length of the screw track were measured by Mimics 19.0.

RESULTS

The CT values of ROI for the three techniques were significantly different between the same gander in each age group (P < 0.05). The difference of screw track lengths for CBT and MCBT in the male and female is significant (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

According to the CT values of the three screw tracks: MCBT > CBT > TT, the MCBT screw track has greater bone-screw surface strength and longer screw tracks than CBT, which is easier to reach the anterior column of the vertebral body contributing to superior biomechanical properties.