98%
921
2 minutes
20
Background: The purpose of this biomechanical in vitro study was to compare the kinematics and intradiscal pressure achieved with 2 methods: L4-L5 pedicle screw-rod fixation (PSRF) with an upper L3-L4 Coflex device and L4-L5 PSRF alone. The results were used to characterize the biomechanics of the topping-off operation with a Coflex device for the lumbar motion segment adjacent to single-level rigid fixation.
Material/methods: Six human cadaveric spine specimens were biomechanically tested in vitro (6 males, 0 females). The 3-dimensional specimen motion in response to applied loads during flexibility tests was determined. Loads were applied along anatomic axes to induce flexion-extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation. All specimens were first studied with intact lumbar motion segments, then with L4-L5 PSRF alone, and finally with L4-L5 PSRF with an upper L3-L4 Coflex device. A non-paired comparison of the 3 configurations under 3 different conditions was made.
Results: PSRF, with or without a Coflex device, significantly increased the range of motion (ROM) in the upper adjacent motion segments in all directions of loading. The intradiscal pressure (IDP) changed slightly. A correlation analysis showed that the ROM and IDP are significantly positively correlated. The application of the upper motion segment of the Coflex device provided greater stability in all directions of motion than did PSRF alone, particularly for extension (p<0.05), while use of a Coflex device did not significantly decrease the IDP compared with PSRF alone (p>0.05).
Conclusions: These results suggest that L4-L5 PSRF with an L3-L4 Coflex device is more stable than L4-L5 PSRF alone. PSRF with an upper Coflex device is a promising alternative to PSRF alone. Based on these biomechanical tests, it might be considered a protective method to prevent adjacent segment degeneration (ASD), although some limitations with this in vitro study must be addressed in the future.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4815995 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.12659/msm.896706 | DOI Listing |
Proc Inst Mech Eng H
August 2025
Department of Bioengineering, Clemson University, Clemson, SC, USA.
Lower extremity compression is effective in treating various vascular and wound conditions. Assessment of IP variations along limb length and under different compression applications are limited. This work quantified both local and gradient in vivo IP map with a piezoresistive (PR) sensor under three different compression applications when applied to the right leg of forty healthy subjects ( = 40).
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJ Clin Med
April 2025
Joint & Arthritis Research, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Himchan Hospital, Seoul 07999, Republic of Korea.
This study aimed to evaluate the long-term clinical usefulness and radiologic changes around the Coflex device following decompression with Coflex insertion for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLSS), with an average follow-up of 14 years. This retrospective study included 147 patients who underwent decompression and Coflex insertion for single-level DLSS at a single institution between January 2007 and December 2010. Patients with spinal stenosis unresponsive to 3 months of conservative treatment were treated surgically.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFBioengineering (Basel)
April 2025
Biomechanics & Biotechnology Lab, Research Institute of Tsinghua University in Shenzhen, Shenzhen 518000, China.
The interspinous process device (IPD) has emerged as a viable alternative for managing lumbar degenerative pathologies. Nevertheless, limited research exists regarding mechanical failure modes including device failure and spinous process fracture. This study developed a novel IPD (IPD-NEW) and systematically evaluated its biomechanical characteristics through finite element (FE) analysis and in vitro cadaveric biomechanical testing.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFInt J Spine Surg
September 2024
Orthopedic Surgery, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA.
Background: Interspinous process devices (IPDs) introduce a new class of complications to surgical decompression without fusion: hardware-related complications. The purpose of this study was to describe the adverse events associated with IPDs.
Study Design: This was a retrospective review of the Food and Drug Administration Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience database.
Acta Bioeng Biomech
December 2023
1Department of Mechanical Engineering, Sri Sivasubramaniya Nadar College of Engineering, Kalavakkam, Chennai - 603110, India.
: Finite element analysis is frequently used for lumbar spine biomechanical analysis. The primary scope of this work is to illustrate, using finite element analysis, how the biomechanical behavior of the transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), along with a novel combination of the interspinous process device (IPD) and pedicle screws, improves lumbar spine stability. : In this study, unilateral pedicle screw fixation (UPSF) and bilateral pedicle screw fixation (BPSF) were used.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF