Assessment of different screw augmentation techniques and screw designs in osteoporotic spines

Abstract

This is an experimental study on human cadaver spines. The objective of this study is to compare the pullout forces between three screw augmentation methods and two different screw designs. Surgical interventions of patients with osteoporosis increase following the epidemiological development. Biomechanically the pedicle provides the strongest screw fixation in healthy bone, whereas in osteoporosis all areas of the vertebra are affected by the disease. This explains the high screw failure rates in those patients. Therefore PMMA augmentation of screws is often mandatory. This study involved investigation of the pullout forces of augmented transpedicular screws in five human lumbar spines (L1-L4). Each spine was treated with four different methods: non-augmented unperforated (solid) screw, perforated screw with vertebroplasty augmentation, solid screw with vertebroplasty augmentation and solid screw with balloon kyphoplasty augmentation. Screws were augmented with Polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA). The pullout forces were measured for each treatment with an Instron testing device. The bone mineral density was measured for each vertebra with Micro-CT. The statistical analysis was performed with a two-sided independent student t test. Forty screws (10 per group and level) were inserted. The vertebroplasty-augmented screws showed a significant higher pullout force (mean 918.5 N, P = 0.001) than control (mean 51 N), the balloon kyphoplasty group did not improve the pullout force significantly (mean 781 N, P > 0.05). However, leakage occurred in some cases treated with perforated screws. All spines showed osteoporosis on Micro-CT. Vertebroplasty-augmented screws, augmentation of perforated screws and balloon kyphoplasty augmented screws show higher pullout resistance than non-augmented screws. Significant higher pullout forces were only reached in the vertebroplasty augmented vertebra. The perforated screw design led to epidural leakage due to the position of the perforation in the screw. The position of the most proximal perforation is critical, depending on screw design and proper insertion depth. Nevertheless, using a properly designed perforated screw will facilitate augmentation and instrumentation in osteoporotic spines.

Application of a crescent-shaped pmma strut in anterior spinal reconstruction of thoracolumbar and lumbar burst fractures: a new technique

“…PMMA bone cement has been used in revision of failed uncemented femoral components of total hip arthroplasty (10), enforcement of transpedicle screw fixation in patients with osteoporosis for decades (2). Despite of its rare complication such as bone cement leakage and pulmonary embolism, more clinical application of PMMA can be seen in vertebroplasty of osteoporotic vertebral fractures in recently years (30).…”

Anterior vertebroplasty of adjacent levels after vertebral body replacement

“…Augmentation of screws does help to diminish the risk of screw loosening [3,5,8], but it is unclear whether it prevents cage subsidence as well. As thoracic and higher lumbar transpedicular screws are introduced with minor convergence, cement, which is injected through the screws, does not reach the central part of the endplates where endplates provide the least resistance to subsidence [18].…”

A pedicle screw system and a lamina hook system provide similar primary and long-term stability: a biomechanical in vitro study with quasi-static and dynamic loading conditions

“…Most experiments are done with pull-out test to investigate the fixation strength of single pedicle screws [4,[11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21] or other posterior fixation systems [16,20,22]. Sometimes screws are also tested with so-called toggling tests where cyclic bending moments are used [23][24][25][26][27].…”