Affiliation:
1. National Taiwan University of Science and Technology
2. National Defense Medical Center
Abstract
Abstract
Introduction:
Using an anterior cervical fixation device in the anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) has evolved to various systems of static and dynamic cervical plates (SCP and DCP). Dynamic cervical plates have been divided into three categories: the rotational (DCP-R), translational (DCP-T), and hybrid (DCP-H) joints. However, little studies have been devoted to systematically investigate the biomechanical differences of dynamic cervical plates.
Materials and Methods
The biomechanical tests of load-deformation properties and failure modes between the SCP and DCP systems are implemented first by using the UHMWPE blocks as the vertebral specimens. The CT-based C2-C7 model simulates the strategies of cervical plate in ACDF surgery is developed with finite-element analyses. One intact, one SCP and two DCP systems are evaluated for their biomechanical properties of bone fusion and tissue responses.
Results
In the situation of biomechanical test, The mean values of the five ACDSP constructs are 393.6% for construct stiffness (p < 0.05) and 183.0% for the first yielding load (p < 0.05) less than those of the SCP groups, respectively. In the situation of finite-element analysis, the rigid-induced ASD is more severe for the SCP, followed by the DCP-H, and the DCP-R is the least.
Discussion and Conclusions:
Considering the degenerative degree of the adjacent segments and osteoporotic severity of the instrumented segments is necessary while using dynamic system. The mobility and stability of the rotational and translational joints are the key factors to the fusion rate and ASD progression. If the adjacent segments have been degenerative, the more flexible system can be adopted to compensate the constrained mobility of the ACDF segments. In the situation of the osteoporotic ACDF vertebrae, the stiffer system is recommended to avoid the cage subsidence.
Publisher
Research Square Platform LLC
Reference10 articles.
1. Fixed vs dynamic plate complications following multilevel anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion with posterior stabilization;Epstein NE;Spinal Cord,2003
2. Pitzen TR, Chrobok J, Stulik J, Ruffing S, Drumm J, Sova L et al. Implant Complications, Fusion, Loss of Lordosis, and Outcome After Anterior Cervical Plating With Dynamic or Rigid Plates: Two-Year Results of a Multi-Centric, Randomized, Controlled Study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009 Apr 1;34(7):641-6.
3. Anterior cervical spine surgery-associated complications in a retrospective case-control study;Tasiou A;J Spine Surg,2017
4. Stress-shielding compared with load-sharing anterior cervical plate fixation: a clinical and radiographic prospective analysis of 50 patients;Saphier PS;J Neurosurg Spine,2007
5. In vitro evaluation of stiffness and load sharing in a two-level corpectomy: comparison of static and dynamic cervical plates;,Fogel GR;Spine J,2010