Advertisement

European Spine Journal

, Volume 19, Issue 12, pp 2122–2129 | Cite as

Biomechanical and histological evaluation of an expandable pedicle screw in osteoporotic spine in sheep

  • Shiyong Wan
  • Wei Lei
  • Zixiang Wu
  • Da Liu
  • Mingxuan Gao
  • Suochao Fu
Original Article

Abstract

Transpedicular fixation can be challenging in the osteoporotic spine as reduced bone mineral density compromises the mechanical stability of the pedicle screw. Here, we sought to investigate the biomechanical and histological properties of stabilization of expandable pedicle screw (EPS) in the osteoporotic spine in sheep. EPSs and standard pedicle screws, SINO screws, were inserted on the vertebral bodies in four female ovariectomized sheep. Pull-out and cyclic bending resistance test were performed to compare the holding strength of these pedicle screws. High-resolution micro-computed tomography (CT) was performed for three-dimensional image reconstruction. We found that the EPSs provided a 59.6% increase in the pull-out strength over the SINO screws. Moreover, the EPSs withstood a greater number of cycles or load with less displacement before loosening. Micro-CT image reconstruction showed that the tissue mineral density, bone volume fraction, bone surface/bone volume ratio, trabecular thickness, and trabecular separation were significantly better in the expandable portion of the EPSs than those in the anterior portion of the SINO screws (P < 0.05). Furthermore, the trabecular architecture in the screw–bone interface was denser in the expandable portion of the EPS than that in the anterior portion of the SINO screw. Histologically, newly formed bone tissues grew into the center of EPS and were in close contact with the EPS. Our results show that the EPS demonstrates improved biomechanical and histological properties over the standard screw in the osteoporotic spine. The EPS may be of value in treating patients with osteoporosis and warrants further clinical studies.

Keywords

Expandable pedicle screw Osteoporosis Screw–bone interface Micro-CT 3D-parameters 

References

  1. 1.
    Bai B, Kummer FJ, Spivak J (2001) Augmentation of anterior vertebral body screw fixation by an injectable, biodegradable calcium phosphate bone substitute. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 26:2679–2683Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barbier A, Martel C, de Vernejoul MC, Tirode F, Nys M, Mocaer G, Morieux C, Murakami H, Lacheretz F (1999) The visualization and evaluation of bone architecture in the rat using three-dimensional X-ray microcomputed tomography. J Bone Miner Metab 17:37–44CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Branemark R, Ohrnell LO, Nilsson P, Thomsen P (1997) Biomechanical characterization of osseointegration during healing: an experimental in vivo study in the rat. Biomaterials 18:969–978CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Becker S, Chavanne A, Spitaler R, Kropik K, Aigner N, Ogon M, Redl H (2008) Assessment of different screw augmentation techniques and screw designs in osteoporotic spines. Eur Spine J 17:1462–1469CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cook SD, Barbera J, Rubi M, Salkeld SL, Whitecloud TS III (2001) Lumbosacral fixation using expandable pedicle screws: an alternative in reoperation and osteoporosis. Spine J 1:109–114CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cook SD, Salkeld SL, Whitecloud TS III, Barbera J (2000) Biomechanical evaluation and preliminary clinical experience with an expansive pedicle screw design. J Spinal Disord 13:230–236CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fransen P (2007) Increasing pedicle screw anchoring in the osteoporotic spine by cement injection through the implant. Technical note and report of three cases. J Neurosurg Spine 7:366–369CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gaines RW Jr (2000) The use of pedicle-screw internal fixation for the operative treatment of spinal disorders. J Bone Joint Surg Am 82A:1458–1476Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hirano T, Hasegawa K, Washio T, Hara T, Takahashi H (1998) Fracture risk during pedicle screw insertion in osteoporotic spine. J Spinal Disord 11:493–497CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jovanović JD, Jovanović MLJ (2004) Biomechanical model of vertebra based on bone remodeling. Med Biol 11:35–39Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kwok AW, Finkelstein JA, Woodside T, Hearn TC, Hu RW (1996) Insertional torque and pull-out strengths of conical and cylindrical pedicle screws in cadaveric bone. Spine 21:2429–2434CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Laib A, Barou O, Vico L, Lafage-Proust MH, Alexandre C, Rugsegger P (2000) 3D micro-computed tomography of trabecular and cortical bone architecture with application to a rat model of immobilisation osteoporosis. Med Biol Eng Comput 38:326–332CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lei W, Wu ZX (2006) Biomechanical evaluation of an expansive pedicle screw in calf vertebrae. Eur Spine J 15:321–326CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Leung KS, Siu WS, Cheung NM, Lui PY, Chow DH, James A, Qin L (2001) Goats as an osteopenic animal model. J Bone Miner Res 16:2348–2355CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lill CA, Fluegel AK, Schneider E (2000) Sheep model for fracture treatment in osteoporotic bone: a pilot study about different induction regimens. J Orthop Trauma 14:559–565CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lill CA, Fluegel AK, Schneider E (2002) Effect of ovariectomy, malnutrition and glucocorticoid application on bone properties in sheep: a pilot study. Osteoporos Int 13:480–486CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lonstein JE, Denis F, Perra JH, Pinto MR, Smith MD, Winter RB (1999) Complications associated with pedicle screws. J Bone Joint Surg Am 81:1519–1528PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lotz JC, Hu SS, Chiu DF, Yu M, Colliou O, Poser RD (1997) Carbonated apatite cement augmentation of pedicle screw fixation in the lumbar spine. Spine 22:2716–2723CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    MacLeay JM, Olson JD, Enns RM, Les CM, Toth CA, Wheeler DL, Turner AS (2004) Dietary-induced metabolic acidosis decreases bone mineral density in mature ovariectomized ewes. Calcif Tissue Int 75:431–437CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Milcan A, Ayan I, Zeren A, Sinmazcelik T, Yilmaz A, Zeren M, Kuyurtar F (2005) Evaluation of cyanoacrylate augmentation of transpedicular screw pullout strength. J Spinal Disord Tech 18:511–514CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mummaneni PV, Haddock SM, Liebschner MA, Keaveny TM, Rosenberg WS (2002) Biomechanical evaluation of a double-threaded pedicle screw in elderly vertebrae. J Spinal Disord Tech 15:64–68PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Newman E, Turner AS, Wark JD (1995) The potential of sheep for the study of osteopenia: current status and comparison with other animal models. Bone 16:277S–284SPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ohlin A, Karlsson M, Düppe H, Hasserius R, Redlund-Johnell I (1994) Complications after transpedicular stabilization of the spine. A survivorship analysis of 163 cases. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 19:2774–2779Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Patel V, Issever AS, Burghardt A, Laib A, Ries M, Majumdar S (2003) Micro CT evaluation of normal and osteoarthritic bone structure in human knee specimens. J Orthop Res 21:6–13CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pfeifer BA, Krag MH, Johnson C (1994) Repair of failed transpedicle screw fixation. A biomechanical study comparing polymethylmethacrylate, milled bone, and matchstick bone reconstruction. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 19:350–353Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Pihlajämaki H, Myllynen P, Böstman O (1997) Complications of transpedicular lumbosacral fixation for non-traumatic disorders. J Bone Joint Surg Br 79:183–189CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Reinhold M, Schwieger K, Goldhahn J, Linke B, Knop C, Blauth M (2006) Influence of screw positioning in a new anterior spine fixator on implant loosening in osteoporotic vertebrae. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 31:406–413Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Renner SM, Lim TH, Kim WJ, Katolik L, An HS, Andersson GB (2004) Augmentation of pedicle screw fixation strength using an injectable calcium phosphate cement as a function of injection timing and method. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 29:E212–E216Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Richter M, Wilke HJ, Kluger P, Neller S, Claes L, Puhl W (2000) Biomechanical evaluation of a new modular rod-screw implant system for posterior instrumentation of the occipito-cervical spine: in vitro comparison with two established implant systems. Eur Spine J 9:417–425CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Rohmiller MT, Schwalm D, Glattes RC, Elalayli TG, Spengler DM (2002) Evaluation of calcium sulfate paste for augmentation of lumbar pedicle screw pullout strength. Spine J 2:255–260CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Turner AS, Alvis M, Myers W, Stevens ML, Lundy MW (1995) Changes in bone mineral density and bone-specific alkaline phosphatase in ovariectomized ewes. Bone 17:395S–402SCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Turner AS (2002) The sheep as a model for osteoporosis in humans. Vet J 163:232–239CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Viljanen JT, Pihlajamäki HK, Törmälä PO, Rokkanen PU (1997) Comparison of the tissue response to absorbable self-reinforced polylactide screws and metallic screws in the fixation of cancellous bone osteotomies: an experimental study on the rabbit distal femur. J Orthop Res 15:398–407CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Wilkes RA, Mackinnon JG, Thomas WG (1994) Neurological deterioration after cement injection into a vertebral body. J Bone Joint Surg Br 76:155PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Wu ZX, Lei W, Hu YY, Wang HQ, Wan SY, Ma ZS, Sang HX, Fu SC, Han YS (2008) Effect of ovariectomy on BMD, micro-architecture and biomechanics of cortical and cancellous bones in a sheep model. Med Eng Phys 30:1112–1118CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Yamazaki M, Shirota T, Tokugawa Y, Motohashi M, Ohno K, Michi K, Yamaguchi A (1999) Bone reactions to titanium screw implants in ovariectomized animals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 87:411–418CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Zarrinkalam MR, Beard H, Schultz CG, Moore RJ (2009) Validation of the sheep as a large animal model for the study of vertebral osteoporosis. Eur Spine J J18:244–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shiyong Wan
    • 1
  • Wei Lei
    • 1
  • Zixiang Wu
    • 1
  • Da Liu
    • 1
  • Mingxuan Gao
    • 1
  • Suochao Fu
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Orthopaedics, Xijing HospitalFourth Military Medical UniversityXi’anChina

Personalised recommendations