• Seong Yi, Dae-Cheol Rim, Seoung Woo Park, Judith A Murovic, Jesse Lim, and Jon Park.
• Department of Neurosurgery, Spine and Spinal Cord Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
• World Neurosurg. 2015 Jun 1;83(6):976-81.

ObjectiveIn vertebrae with low bone mineral densities pull out strength is often poor, thus various substances have been used to fill screw holes before screw placement for corrective spine surgery. We performed biomechanical cadaveric studies to compare nonaugmented pedicle screws versus hydroxyapatite, calcium phosphate, or polymethylmethacrylate augmented pedicle screws for screw tightening torques and pull out strengths in spine procedures requiring bone screw insertion.MethodsSeven human cadaveric T10-L1 spines with 28 vertebral bodies were examined by x-ray to exclude bony abnormalities. Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry scans evaluated bone mineral densities. Twenty of 28 vertebrae underwent ipsilateral fluoroscopic placement of 6-mm holes augmented with hydroxyapatite, calcium phosphate, or polymethylmethacrylate, followed by transpedicular screw placements. Controls were pedicle screw placements in the contralateral hemivertebrae without augmentation. All groups were evaluated for axial pull out strength using a biomechanical loading frame.ResultsMean pedicle screw axial pull out strength compared with controls increased by 12.5% in hydroxyapatite augmented hemivertebrae (P = 0.600) and by 14.9% in calcium phosphate augmented hemivertebrae (P = 0.234), but the increase was not significant for either method. Pull out strength of polymethylmethacrylate versus hydroxyapatite augmented pedicle screws was 60.8% higher (P = 0.028).ConclusionsHydroxyapatite and calcium phosphate augmentation in osteoporotic vertebrae showed a trend toward increased pedicle screw pull out strength versus controls. Pedicle screw pull out force of polymethylmethacrylate in the insertion stage was higher than that of hydroxyapatite. However, hydroxyapatite is likely a better clinical alternative to polymethylmethacrylate, as hydroxyapatite augmentation, unlike polymethylmethacrylate augmentation, stimulates bone growth and can be revised.Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

23 keywords...

hide…