A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

The Biomechanics of the Transpedicular Endoscopic Approach. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Study Design: Biomechanical cadaveric study.

Objective: The goal of this study was to analyze the effects of an endoscopic transpedicular approach with different drill diameters (6 and 8 mm) and compare them with the intact native side. In addition, the influence of bone quality on the resistance of the pedicle was investigated.

Summary Of Background Data: Clinical studies have repeatedly highlighted the benefits of endoscopic transpedicular decompression for downmigrated lumbar disc herniations. However, the biomechanical effects on pedicle stability have not been studied up to now.

Materials And Methods: Twenty-four vertebras originating from four fresh-frozen cadavers were tested under uniaxial compression load in a ramp-to-failure test: (1) the tunneled pedicle on one side, and (2) the native pedicle on the other side. Twelve lumbar vertebrae were assigned to drill diameter of 6 mm and the other 12 to diameter of 8 mm.

Results: The median ratio of sustained force for the operated side compared with the intact contralateral side is equal to 74% (63-88) for both drill diameters combined. An 8 mm transpedicular approach recorded an axial resistance of 77% (60-88) compared with the intact contralateral side ( P =0.002). A 6 mm approach resulted in an axial resistance of 72% (66-84) compared with the intact opposite side ( P =0.01). No significant difference between the two different drill diameters was recorded ( P =1). For all three subgroups (intact, 8 mm, 6 mm) the Hounsfield units-values and the absolute resistance force showed significant correlations (intact: ρ=0.859; P <0.001; 8 mm: ρ=0.902; P <0.001; 6 mm: ρ=0.835; P <0.001).

Conclusion: The transpedicular approach significantly reduces the axial resistance force of the pedicle, which may lead to pedicle fracture. Bone quality correlated positively with the absolute resistance force of the pedicle, whereas the influence of the drill hole diameter plays only a limited role.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11232940PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000004871DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

drill diameters
12
compared intact
12
endoscopic transpedicular
8
transpedicular approach
8
pedicle side
8
intact contralateral
8
contralateral side
8
axial resistance
8
side
7
intact
6

Similar Publications