Biomechanical analysis and review of lateral lumbar fusion constructs

Andrew Cappuccino, G. Bryan Cornwall, Alexander W L Turner, Guy R. Fogel, Huy T. Duong, Kee D Kim, Darrel S. Brodke

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

79 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Study design.: Biomechanical study and the review of literature on lumbar interbody fusion constructs. Objective.: To demonstrate the comparative stabilizing effects of lateral interbody fusion with various supplemental internal fixation options. Summary of background data.: Lumbar interbody fusion procedures are regularly performed using anterior, posterior, and more recently, lateral approaches. The biomechanical profile of each is determined by the extent of resection of local supportive structures, implant size and orientation, and the type of supplemental internal fixation used. Methods.: Pure moment flexibility testing was performed using a custom-built 6 degree-of-freedom system to apply a moment of ±7.5 Nm in each motion plane, while motion segment kinematics were evaluated using an optoelectronic motion system. Constructs tested included the intact spine, stand-alone extreme lateral interbody implant, interbody implant with lateral plate, unilateral and bilateral pedicle screw fixation. These results were evaluated against those from literature-reported biomechanical studies of other lumbar interbody constructs. Results.: All conditions demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in range of motion (ROM) as a percentage of intact. In flexion-extension, ROM was 31.6% stand-alone, 32.5% lateral fixation, and 20.4% and 13.0% unilateral and bilateral pedicle screw fixation, respectively. In lateral bending, the trend was similar with greater reduction with lateral fixation than in flexion-extension; ROM was 32.5% stand-alone, 15.9% lateral fixation, and 21.6% and 14.4% unilateral and bilateral pedicle screw fixation. ROM was greatest in axial rotation; 69.4% stand-alone, 53.4% lateral fixation, and 51.3% and 41.7% unilateral and bilateral pedicle screw fixation, respectively. Conclusion.: The extreme lateral interbody construct provided the largest stand-alone reduction in ROM compared with literature-reported ALIF and TLIF constructs. Supplemental bilateral pedicle screw-based fixation provided the overall greatest reduction in ROM, similar among all interbody approach techniques. Lateral fixation and unilateral pedicle screw fixation provided intermediate reductions in ROM. Clinically, surgeons may evaluate these comparative results to choose fixation options commensurate with the stability requirements of individual patients.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalSpine
Volume35
Issue numberSUPPL. 26S
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 15 2010

Fingerprint

Articular Range of Motion
Biomechanical Phenomena
Pedicle Screws
Spine

Keywords

  • extreme lateral
  • lumbar interbody fusion
  • range of motion
  • stability
  • XLIF

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Neurology
  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

Cite this

Cappuccino, A., Cornwall, G. B., Turner, A. W. L., Fogel, G. R., Duong, H. T., Kim, K. D., & Brodke, D. S. (2010). Biomechanical analysis and review of lateral lumbar fusion constructs. Spine, 35(SUPPL. 26S). https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e318202308b

Biomechanical analysis and review of lateral lumbar fusion constructs. / Cappuccino, Andrew; Cornwall, G. Bryan; Turner, Alexander W L; Fogel, Guy R.; Duong, Huy T.; Kim, Kee D; Brodke, Darrel S.

In: Spine, Vol. 35, No. SUPPL. 26S, 15.12.2010.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Cappuccino, A, Cornwall, GB, Turner, AWL, Fogel, GR, Duong, HT, Kim, KD & Brodke, DS 2010, 'Biomechanical analysis and review of lateral lumbar fusion constructs', Spine, vol. 35, no. SUPPL. 26S. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e318202308b
Cappuccino A, Cornwall GB, Turner AWL, Fogel GR, Duong HT, Kim KD et al. Biomechanical analysis and review of lateral lumbar fusion constructs. Spine. 2010 Dec 15;35(SUPPL. 26S). https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e318202308b
Cappuccino, Andrew ; Cornwall, G. Bryan ; Turner, Alexander W L ; Fogel, Guy R. ; Duong, Huy T. ; Kim, Kee D ; Brodke, Darrel S. / Biomechanical analysis and review of lateral lumbar fusion constructs. In: Spine. 2010 ; Vol. 35, No. SUPPL. 26S.
@article{370d3c5a41d54141a31925251132ae79,
title = "Biomechanical analysis and review of lateral lumbar fusion constructs",
abstract = "Study design.: Biomechanical study and the review of literature on lumbar interbody fusion constructs. Objective.: To demonstrate the comparative stabilizing effects of lateral interbody fusion with various supplemental internal fixation options. Summary of background data.: Lumbar interbody fusion procedures are regularly performed using anterior, posterior, and more recently, lateral approaches. The biomechanical profile of each is determined by the extent of resection of local supportive structures, implant size and orientation, and the type of supplemental internal fixation used. Methods.: Pure moment flexibility testing was performed using a custom-built 6 degree-of-freedom system to apply a moment of ±7.5 Nm in each motion plane, while motion segment kinematics were evaluated using an optoelectronic motion system. Constructs tested included the intact spine, stand-alone extreme lateral interbody implant, interbody implant with lateral plate, unilateral and bilateral pedicle screw fixation. These results were evaluated against those from literature-reported biomechanical studies of other lumbar interbody constructs. Results.: All conditions demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in range of motion (ROM) as a percentage of intact. In flexion-extension, ROM was 31.6{\%} stand-alone, 32.5{\%} lateral fixation, and 20.4{\%} and 13.0{\%} unilateral and bilateral pedicle screw fixation, respectively. In lateral bending, the trend was similar with greater reduction with lateral fixation than in flexion-extension; ROM was 32.5{\%} stand-alone, 15.9{\%} lateral fixation, and 21.6{\%} and 14.4{\%} unilateral and bilateral pedicle screw fixation. ROM was greatest in axial rotation; 69.4{\%} stand-alone, 53.4{\%} lateral fixation, and 51.3{\%} and 41.7{\%} unilateral and bilateral pedicle screw fixation, respectively. Conclusion.: The extreme lateral interbody construct provided the largest stand-alone reduction in ROM compared with literature-reported ALIF and TLIF constructs. Supplemental bilateral pedicle screw-based fixation provided the overall greatest reduction in ROM, similar among all interbody approach techniques. Lateral fixation and unilateral pedicle screw fixation provided intermediate reductions in ROM. Clinically, surgeons may evaluate these comparative results to choose fixation options commensurate with the stability requirements of individual patients.",
keywords = "extreme lateral, lumbar interbody fusion, range of motion, stability, XLIF",
author = "Andrew Cappuccino and Cornwall, {G. Bryan} and Turner, {Alexander W L} and Fogel, {Guy R.} and Duong, {Huy T.} and Kim, {Kee D} and Brodke, {Darrel S.}",
year = "2010",
month = "12",
day = "15",
doi = "10.1097/BRS.0b013e318202308b",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "35",
journal = "Spine",
issn = "0362-2436",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "SUPPL. 26S",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Biomechanical analysis and review of lateral lumbar fusion constructs

AU - Cappuccino, Andrew

AU - Cornwall, G. Bryan

AU - Turner, Alexander W L

AU - Fogel, Guy R.

AU - Duong, Huy T.

AU - Kim, Kee D

AU - Brodke, Darrel S.

PY - 2010/12/15

Y1 - 2010/12/15

N2 - Study design.: Biomechanical study and the review of literature on lumbar interbody fusion constructs. Objective.: To demonstrate the comparative stabilizing effects of lateral interbody fusion with various supplemental internal fixation options. Summary of background data.: Lumbar interbody fusion procedures are regularly performed using anterior, posterior, and more recently, lateral approaches. The biomechanical profile of each is determined by the extent of resection of local supportive structures, implant size and orientation, and the type of supplemental internal fixation used. Methods.: Pure moment flexibility testing was performed using a custom-built 6 degree-of-freedom system to apply a moment of ±7.5 Nm in each motion plane, while motion segment kinematics were evaluated using an optoelectronic motion system. Constructs tested included the intact spine, stand-alone extreme lateral interbody implant, interbody implant with lateral plate, unilateral and bilateral pedicle screw fixation. These results were evaluated against those from literature-reported biomechanical studies of other lumbar interbody constructs. Results.: All conditions demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in range of motion (ROM) as a percentage of intact. In flexion-extension, ROM was 31.6% stand-alone, 32.5% lateral fixation, and 20.4% and 13.0% unilateral and bilateral pedicle screw fixation, respectively. In lateral bending, the trend was similar with greater reduction with lateral fixation than in flexion-extension; ROM was 32.5% stand-alone, 15.9% lateral fixation, and 21.6% and 14.4% unilateral and bilateral pedicle screw fixation. ROM was greatest in axial rotation; 69.4% stand-alone, 53.4% lateral fixation, and 51.3% and 41.7% unilateral and bilateral pedicle screw fixation, respectively. Conclusion.: The extreme lateral interbody construct provided the largest stand-alone reduction in ROM compared with literature-reported ALIF and TLIF constructs. Supplemental bilateral pedicle screw-based fixation provided the overall greatest reduction in ROM, similar among all interbody approach techniques. Lateral fixation and unilateral pedicle screw fixation provided intermediate reductions in ROM. Clinically, surgeons may evaluate these comparative results to choose fixation options commensurate with the stability requirements of individual patients.

AB - Study design.: Biomechanical study and the review of literature on lumbar interbody fusion constructs. Objective.: To demonstrate the comparative stabilizing effects of lateral interbody fusion with various supplemental internal fixation options. Summary of background data.: Lumbar interbody fusion procedures are regularly performed using anterior, posterior, and more recently, lateral approaches. The biomechanical profile of each is determined by the extent of resection of local supportive structures, implant size and orientation, and the type of supplemental internal fixation used. Methods.: Pure moment flexibility testing was performed using a custom-built 6 degree-of-freedom system to apply a moment of ±7.5 Nm in each motion plane, while motion segment kinematics were evaluated using an optoelectronic motion system. Constructs tested included the intact spine, stand-alone extreme lateral interbody implant, interbody implant with lateral plate, unilateral and bilateral pedicle screw fixation. These results were evaluated against those from literature-reported biomechanical studies of other lumbar interbody constructs. Results.: All conditions demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in range of motion (ROM) as a percentage of intact. In flexion-extension, ROM was 31.6% stand-alone, 32.5% lateral fixation, and 20.4% and 13.0% unilateral and bilateral pedicle screw fixation, respectively. In lateral bending, the trend was similar with greater reduction with lateral fixation than in flexion-extension; ROM was 32.5% stand-alone, 15.9% lateral fixation, and 21.6% and 14.4% unilateral and bilateral pedicle screw fixation. ROM was greatest in axial rotation; 69.4% stand-alone, 53.4% lateral fixation, and 51.3% and 41.7% unilateral and bilateral pedicle screw fixation, respectively. Conclusion.: The extreme lateral interbody construct provided the largest stand-alone reduction in ROM compared with literature-reported ALIF and TLIF constructs. Supplemental bilateral pedicle screw-based fixation provided the overall greatest reduction in ROM, similar among all interbody approach techniques. Lateral fixation and unilateral pedicle screw fixation provided intermediate reductions in ROM. Clinically, surgeons may evaluate these comparative results to choose fixation options commensurate with the stability requirements of individual patients.

KW - extreme lateral

KW - lumbar interbody fusion

KW - range of motion

KW - stability

KW - XLIF

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=78650929361&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=78650929361&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318202308b

DO - 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318202308b

M3 - Article

VL - 35

JO - Spine

JF - Spine

SN - 0362-2436

IS - SUPPL. 26S

ER -