Does number of rods matter? 4-, 5-, and 6-rods across a lumbar pedicle subtraction osteotomy: a finite element analysis.
biomechanical · Level V
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 36484928.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1007/s43390-022-00627-0 and PMC identifier 10147790.
- Licence recorded as CC BY.
- The licence permits redistribution, so the abstract is shown in full and the full text is available from the publisher.
Abstract
To assess biomechanics of a lumbar PSO stabilized with different multi-rod constructs (4-, 5-, 6-rods) using satellite and accessory rods. A validated spinopelvic finite element model with a L3 PSO was used to evaluate the following constructs: 2 primary rods T10-pelvis ("Control"), two satellite rods (4-rod), two satellite rods + one accessory rod (5-rod), or two satellite rods + two accessory rods (6-rod). Data recorded included: ROM T10-S1 and L2-L4, von Mises stresses on primary, satellite, and accessory rods, factor of safety yield stress, and force across the PSO surfaces. Percent differences relative to Control were calculated. Compared to Control, 4-rods increased PSO flexion and extension. Lower PSO ROMs were observed for 5- and 6-rods compared to 4-rods. However, 4-rod (348.6 N) and 5-rod (343.2 N) showed higher PSO forces than 2-rods (336 N) and 6-rods had lower PSO forces (324.2 N). 5- and 6-rods led to the lowest rod von Mises stresses across the PSO. 6-rod had the maximum factor of safety on the primary rods. In this finite element analysis, 4-rods reduced stresses on primary rods across a lumbar PSO. Although increased rigidity afforded by 5- and 6-rods decreased rod stresses, it resulted in less load transfer to the anterior vertebral column (particularly for 6-rod), which may not be favorable for the healing of the anterior column. A balance between the construct's rigidity and anterior load sharing is essential.
Medical subject headings
- Lumbar Vertebrae
- Spinal Fusion
Anatomy
- lumbar spine