• Spine J · May 2021

    Biomechanical comparison of semi-rigid junctional fixation techniques to prevent proximal junctional failure after thoracolumbar adult spinal deformity correction.

    • Remco J P Doodkorte, Alex K Roth, Jacobus J Arts, LatasterL M ArnoLMADepartment of Anatomy and Embryology, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University Medical Center, P. Debyelaan 25, 6229 HX, Maastricht, The Netherlands., Lodewijk W van Rhijn, and Paul C Willems.
    • Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Research School CAPHRI, Maastricht University Medical Center, P. Debyelaan 25, 6229 HX, Maastricht, The Netherlands. Electronic address: rjp.doodkorte@maastrichtuniversity.nl.
    • Spine J. 2021 May 1; 21 (5): 855-864.

    Background ContextAdult spinal deformity patients treated operatively by long-segment instrumented spinal fusion are prone to develop proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) and failure (PJF). A gradual transition in range of motion (ROM) at the proximal end of spinal instrumentation may reduce the incidence of PJK and PJF, however, previously evaluated techniques have not directly been compared.PurposeTo determine the biomechanical characteristics of five different posterior spinal instrumentation techniques to achieve semirigid junctional fixation, or "topping-off," between the rigid pedicle screw fixation (PSF) and the proximal uninstrumented spine.Study DesignBiomechanical cadaveric study.MethodsSeven fresh-frozen human cadaveric spine segments (T8-L3) were subjected to ex vivo pure moment loading in flexion-extension, lateral bending and axial rotation up to 5 Nm. The native condition, three-level PSF (T11-L2), PSF with supplemental transverse process hooks at T10 (TPH), and two sublaminar taping techniques (knotted and clamped) as one- (T10) or two-level (T9, T10) semirigid junctional fixation techniques were compared. The ROM and neutral zone (NZ) of the segments were normalized to the native condition. The linearity of the transition zones over three or four segments was determined through linear regression analysis.ResultsAll techniques achieved a significantly reduced ROM at T10-T11 in flexion-extension and axial rotation relative to the PSF condition. Additionally, both two-level sublaminar taping techniques (CT2, KT2) had a significantly reduced ROM at T9-T10. One-level clamped sublaminar tape (CT1) had a significantly lower ROM and NZ compared with one-level knotted sublaminar tape (KT1) at T10-T11. Linear regression analysis showed the highest linear correlation between ROM and vertebral level for TPH and the lowest linear correlation for CT2.ConclusionsAll studied semirigid junctional fixation techniques significantly reduced the ROM at the junctional levels and thus provide a more gradual transition than pedicle screws. TPH achieves the most linear transition over three vertebrae, whereas KT2 achieves that over four vertebrae. In contrast, CT2 effectively is a one-level semirigid junctional fixation technique with a shift in the upper rigid fixation level. Clamped sublaminar tape reduces the NZ greatly, whereas knotted sublaminar tape and TPH maintain a more physiologic NZ. Clinical validation is ultimately required to translate the biomechanics of various semirigid junctional fixation techniques into the clinical goal of reducing the incidence of proximal junctional kyphosis and failure.Clinical SignificanceThe direct biomechanical comparison of multiple instrumentation techniques that aim to reduce the incidence of PJK after thoracolumbar spinal fusion surgery provides a basis upon which clinical studies could be designed. Furthermore, the data provided in this study can be used to further analyze the biomechanical effects of the studied techniques using finite element models to better predict their post-operative effectiveness.Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…