Interlaminar stabilization offers greater biomechanical advantage compared to interspinous stabilization after lumbar decompression: a finite element analysis

Abstract

Background Interlaminar stabilization and interspinous stabilization are two newer minimally invasive methods for lumbar spine stabilization, used frequently in conjunction with lumbar decompression to treat lumbar stenosis. The two methods share certain similarities, therefore, frequently being categorized together. However, the two methods offer distinct biomechanical properties, which affect their respective effectiveness and surgical success. Objective To compare the biomechanical characteristics of interlaminar stabilization after lumbar decompression (ILS) and interspinous stabilization after lumbar decompression (ISS). For comparison, lumbar decompression alone (DA) and decompression with instrumented fusion (DF) were also included in the biomechanical analysis. Methods Four finite element models were constructed, i.e., DA, DF, ISS, and ILS. To minimize device influence and focus on the biomechanical properties of different methods, Coflex device as a model system was placed at different position for the comparison of ISS and ILS. The range of motion (ROM) and disc stress peak at the surgical and adjacent levels were compared among the four surgical constructs. The stress peak of the spinous process, whole device, and device wing was compared between ISS and ILS. Results Compared with DA, the ROM and disc stress at the surgical level in ILS or ISS were much lower in extension. The ROM and disc stress at the surgical level in ILS were 1.27° and 0.36 MPa, respectively, and in ISS 1.51°and 0.55 MPa, respectively in extension. This is compared with 4.71° and 1.44 MPa, respectively in DA. ILS (2.06–4.85° and 0.37–0.98 MPa, respectively) or ISS (2.07–4.78° and 0.37–0.98 MPa, respectively) also induced much lower ROM and disc stress at the adjacent levels compared with DF (2.50–7.20° and 0.37–1.20 MPa, respectively). ILS further reduced the ROM and disc stress at the surgical level by 8% and 25%, respectively, compared to ISS. The stress peak of the spinous process in ILS was significantly lower than that in ISS (13.93–101 MPa vs. 31.08–172.5 MPa). In rotation, ILS yielded a much lower stress peak in the instrumentation wing than ISS (128.7 MPa vs. 222.1 MPa). Conclusion ILS and ISS partly address the issues of segmental instability in DA and hypermobility and overload at the adjacent levels in DF. ILS achieves greater segmental stability and results in a lower disc stress, compared to ISS. In addition, ILS reduces the risk of spinous process fracture and device failure.

Biomechanical Effects of Polyetheretherketone and Titanium Rods in Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Finite Element Analysis

“…Consistent with a previous study on the lumbar FE model, the 1 mm thick cortical layers and the 0.5 mm thick endplates covered the surface of the vertebral body (Fig. 1a-c) [31]. The nucleus pulposus (NP) was simulated as an incompressible uid element, which accounted for 40% of the intervertebral disc volume (Fig.…”

“…This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of our hospital, and informed consent was obtained from the volunteer. The procedure for lumbar model reconstruction was similar to that used in previous studies [31]. Thin-layer (0.625 mm) CT data were saved in DICOM format and imported into Mimics (Materialise Inc., Leuven, Belgium) to generate a surface model.…”

“…The annulus brosus (AF) was constructed using a heterogeneous ber-reinforced composite consisting of annulus bers and a ground substance (Fig. 1e-f) [31,33]. The ligaments were modeled as tension truss elements, including the anterior longitudinal, posterior longitudinal, avum, supraspinous, interspinous, intertransverse, and capsular ligaments (Table 1).…”

Treatment of Old Vertebral Compression Fracture With Kyphosis by Different Reconstruction Methods: a Finite Element Analysis

“…Fusion xation reduces thoracolumbar motion, as shown in previous studies [15,19]. Lu and Lu found that the short-segment fusion xed model decreased by 52-94% compared with the intact model [20].…”

Biomechanical finite element analysis of vertebral column resection and posterior unilateral vertebral resection and reconstruction osteotomy

“…Fusion fixation reduces thoracolumbar motion, as shown in previous studies [15,19]. Lu and Lu found that the short-segment fusion fixed model decreased by 52-94% compared with the intact model [20].…”