Journal of spinal disorders & techniques
-
J Spinal Disord Tech · Jul 2014
Height restoration and preservation in osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures: a biomechanical analysis of standard balloon kyphoplasty versus radiofrequency kyphoplasty in a cadaveric model.
Biomechanical cadaver study. ⋯ On the basis of our results, the unipedicular RFK in osteoporotic compression fractures might represent a promising alternative for the clinical setting.
-
J Spinal Disord Tech · Jun 2014
Do lordotic Cages Provide Better Segmental Lordosis Versus Non-lordotic Cages in Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion (LLIF)?
Retrospective Comparative Radiographic Review. ⋯ Lordotic cages provided significant increase in operative level segmental lordosis compared to non-lordotic cages although overall lumbar lordosis remained unchanged. Anterior and posterior disc heights were significantly increased by both cages, providing basis for indirect spinal decompression.
-
J Spinal Disord Tech · Jun 2014
Comparative Study Clinical TrialComparison of the clinical outcome in overweight or obese patients after minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.
This is a prospective single-center nonrandomized control clinical study involving 81 overweight or obese patients who underwent minimally invasive or open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). ⋯ MiTLIF is a safe and reliable procedure for treatment of overweight or obese patients. The minimally invasive technique offers several potential advantages when compared with the open procedure. Although this technique needs a longer x-ray exposure time, it may still be a good option for overweight or obese patients.
-
J Spinal Disord Tech · Jun 2014
Biomechanical analysis of various footprints of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion devices.
A biomechanical finite element modeling study of the human lumbar spine. ⋯ An articulating, large footprint, peripherally placed TLIF device affords substantial biomechanical advantages. This device may be able to reduce the incidence of subsidence because of its ability to reduce and distribute the endplate stresses in the stronger peripheral region. It may also reduce the posterior hardware failure incidence owing to its ability to reduce the screw stresses as compared with traditional TLIF. Although double TLIF has been demonstrated to have similar biomechanical advantages as the AVID, complications associated with double TLIF (ie, larger surgical incision, longer surgical procedure, placement and alignment challenges) support AVID as a better optimized alternative.