Evaluation of iliac screw, S2 alar-iliac screw and laterally placed triangular titanium implants for sacropelvic fixation in combination with posterior lumbar instrumentation: a finite element study
This study aimed to implement laterally placed triangular titanium implants as a technique of sacropelvic fixation in long posterior lumbar instrumentation and to characterize the effects of iliac screws, S2 alar-iliac screws and of triangular implants on rod and S1 pedicle screw stresses.
Four female models of the lumbopelvic spine were created. For each of them, five finite element models replicating the following configurations were generated: intact, posterior fixation with pedicle screws to S1 (PED), with PED and iliac screws (IL), with PED and S2 alar-iliac (S2AI) screws, and with PED and bilateral triangular titanium implants (SI). Simulations were conducted in compression, flexion–extension, lateral bending and axial rotation. Rod stresses in the L5-S1 segment as well as in the S1 pedicle screws were compared.
One anatomical model was not simulated due to dysmorphia of the sacroiliac joints. PED resulted in the highest implant stresses. Values up to 337 MPa in lateral bending were noted, which were more than double than the other configurations. When compared with IL, S2AI and SI resulted in lower stresses in both screws and rods (on average 33% and 41% for S2AI and 17% and 50% for SI).
Implant stresses after S2AI and SI fixations were lower than those attributable to IL. Therefore, pedicle screws and rods may have a lower risk of mechanical failure when coupled with sacropelvic fixation via S2AI or triangular titanium implants, although the risk of clinical loosening remains an area of further investigation.
KeywordsSacroiliac joint Sacropelvic fixation Finite element analysis Alar-iliac screws Iliac screws Triangular implants
We thank Dr. Enrico Gallazzi for critical reading of the manuscript.
Funding by SI-BONE Inc. (Santa Clara, CA, USA) is gratefully acknowledged.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Written informed consent for the use of the data for research purposes was obtained.
- 4.Emami A, Deviren V, Berven S et al (2002) Outcome and complications of long fusions to the sacrum in adult spine deformity: Luque-Galveston, combined iliac and sacral screws, and sacral fixation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 27:776–786. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200204010-00017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.Edwards CC, Bridwell KH, Patel A et al (2004) Long adult deformity fusions to L5 and the sacrum: a matched cohort analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 29:1996–2005. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.brs.0000138272.54896.33 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Fleischer GD, Kim YJ, Ferrara LA et al (2012) Biomechanical analysis of sacral screw strain and range of motion in long posterior spinal fixation constructs: effects of lumbosacral fixation strategies in reducing sacral screw strains. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 37:7–13. https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0b013e31822ce9a7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.Sutterlin CE III, Field A, Ferrara LA et al (2016) Range of motion, sacral screw and rod strain in long posterior spinal constructs: a biomechanical comparison between S2 alar iliac screws with traditional fixation strategies. J Spine Surg 2:266–276. https://doi.org/10.21037/jss.2016.11.01 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.Kim YJ, Bridwell KH, Lenke LG et al (2006) Pseudarthrosis in long adult spinal deformity instrumentation and fusion to the sacrum: prevalence and risk factor analysis of 144 cases. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 31:2329–2336. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.brs.0000238968.82799.d9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 33.Hlubek RJ, Godzik J, Newcomb AGUS, Lehrman JN, de Andrada B, Bohl MA, Farber SH, Kelly BP, Turner JD (2018) Iliac screws may not be necessary in long-segment constructs with L5-S1 anterior lumbar interbody fusion: cadaveric study of stability and instrumentation strain. Spine J. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2018.11.004 Google Scholar
- 40.Camisa W, Condez BI, Leasure JM et al (2014) Development of a biomechanical model for sacroiliac range of motion. In: 2014 AAOS Annual Meeting, pp 42–43Google Scholar
- 42.Liu C, Kamara A, Yan Y (2018) Investigation into the biomechanics of lumbar spine micro-dynamic pedicle screw. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 19(231):1–11Google Scholar