Biomechanical Analysis of Porous Additive Manufactured Cages for Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Finite Element Analysis

被引:50
作者
Zhang, Zhenjun [1 ,2 ]
Li, Hui [3 ]
Fogel, Guy R. [4 ]
Liao, Zhenhua [2 ]
Li, Yang [1 ,2 ]
Liu, Weiqiang [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Tsinghua Univ, Dept Mech Engn, Beijing, Peoples R China
[2] Tsinghua Univ, Res Inst, Biomech & Biotechnol Lab, Shenzhen, Peoples R China
[3] Naton Sci & Technol Grp, Beijing, Peoples R China
[4] Spine Pain Begone Clin, San Antonio, TX USA
关键词
Biomechanics; Facet joint force (FJF); Finite element analysis (FEA); Lumbar interbody fusion; Porous cage; Range of motion (ROM); Subsidence; PEDICLE SCREW FIXATION; MECHANICAL-PROPERTIES; BONE-GRAFT; IN-VITRO; SPINE; STABILITY; IMPLANTS; SEGMENT; DISC; COMPRESSION;
D O I
10.1016/j.wneu.2017.12.127
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
BACKGROUND: A porous additive manufactured (AM) cage may provide stability similar to that of traditional solid cages and may be beneficial to bone ingrowth. The biomechanical influence of various porous cages on stability, subsidence, stresses in cage, and facet contact force has not been fully described. The purpose of this study was to verify biomechanical effects of porous AM cages. METHODS: The surgical finite element models with various cages were constructed. The partially porous titanium (PPT) cages and fully porous titanium (FPT) cages were applied. The mechanical parameters of porous materials were obtained by mechanical test. Then the porous AM cages were compared with solid titanium (TI) cage and solid polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage. The 4 motion modes were simulated. Range of motion (ROM), cage stress, end plate stress, and facet joint force (FJF) were compared. RESULTS: For all the surgical models, ROM decreased by >90%. Compared with TI and PPT cages, PEEK and FPT cages substantially reduced the maximum stresses in cage and end plate in all motion modes. Compared with PEEK cages, the stresses in cage and end plate for FPT cages decreased, whereas the ROM increased. Comparing FPT cages, the stresses in cage and end plate decreased with increasing porosity, whereas ROM increased with increasing porosity. After interbody fusion, FJF was substantially reduced in all motion modes except for flexion. CONCLUSIONS: Fully porous cages may offer an alternative to solid PEEK cages in lateral lumbar interbody fusion. However, it may be prudent to further increase the porosity of the cage.
引用
收藏
页码:E581 / E591
页数:11
相关论文
共 43 条
[1]   Bilateral pedicle screw fixation provides superior biomechanical stability in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a finite element study [J].
Ambati, Divya V. ;
Wright, Edward K., Jr. ;
Lehman, Ronald A., Jr. ;
Kang, Daniel G. ;
Wagner, Scott C. ;
Dmitriev, Anton E. .
SPINE JOURNAL, 2015, 15 (08) :1812-1822
[2]   Parametric convergence sensitivity and validation of a finite element model of the human lumbar spine [J].
Ayturk, Ugur M. ;
Puttlitz, Christian M. .
COMPUTER METHODS IN BIOMECHANICS AND BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING, 2011, 14 (08) :695-705
[3]   In vitro, biomechanical comparison of an anterior lumbar interbody fusion with an anteriorly placed, low-profile lumbar plate and posteriorly placed pedicle screws or translaminar screws [J].
Beaubien, BP ;
Derincek, A ;
Lew, WD ;
Wood, KB .
SPINE, 2005, 30 (16) :1846-1851
[4]   MECHANICAL-PROPERTIES OF HUMAN LUMBAR SPINE MOTION SEGMENTS .2. RESPONSES IN COMPRESSION AND SHEAR - INFLUENCE OF GROSS MORPHOLOGY [J].
BERKSON, MH ;
NACHEMSON, A ;
SCHULTZ, AB .
JOURNAL OF BIOMECHANICAL ENGINEERING-TRANSACTIONS OF THE ASME, 1979, 101 (01) :53-57
[5]   CHANGE OF DISK HEIGHT, RADIAL DISK BULGE, AND INTRADISCAL PRESSURE FROM DISCECTOMY - AN INVITRO INVESTIGATION ON HUMAN LUMBAR DISKS [J].
BRINCKMANN, P ;
GROOTENBOER, H .
SPINE, 1991, 16 (06) :641-646
[6]   Mechanical properties of open-cell metallic biomaterials manufactured using additive manufacturing [J].
Campoli, G. ;
Borleffs, M. S. ;
Yavari, S. Amin ;
Wauthle, R. ;
Weinans, H. ;
Zadpoor, A. A. .
MATERIALS & DESIGN, 2013, 49 :957-965
[7]   Biomechanical Analysis and Review of Lateral Lumbar Fusion Constructs [J].
Cappuccino, Andrew ;
Cornwall, G. Bryan ;
Turner, Alexander W. L. ;
Fogel, Guy R. ;
Duong, Huy T. ;
Kim, Kee D. ;
Brodke, Darrel S. .
SPINE, 2010, 35 (26) :S361-S367
[8]   Biomechanical Effects of the Geometry of Ball-and-Socket Artificial Disc on Lumbar Spine [J].
Choi, Jisoo ;
Shin, Dong-Ah ;
Kim, Sohee .
SPINE, 2017, 42 (06) :E332-E339
[9]   Analysis of the effect of lumbar spine fusion on the superior adjacent intervertebral disk in the presence of disk degeneration, using the three-dimensional finite element method [J].
Chosa, E ;
Goto, K ;
Totoribe, K ;
Tajima, N .
JOURNAL OF SPINAL DISORDERS & TECHNIQUES, 2004, 17 (02) :134-139
[10]   Comparison of low back fusion techniques: Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) or posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) approaches [J].
Cole C.D. ;
McCall T.D. ;
Schmidt M.H. ;
Dailey A.T. .
Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine, 2009, 2 (2) :118-126