Effect of augmentation techniques on the failure of pedicle screws under cranio-caudal cyclic loading

Abstract

Purpose

Augmentation of pedicle screws is recommended in selected indications (for instance: osteoporosis). Generally, there are two techniques for pedicle screw augmentation: inserting the screw in the non cured cement and in situ-augmentation with cannulated fenestrated screws, which can be applied percutaneously. Most of the published studies used an axial pull out test for evaluation of the pedicle screw anchorage. However, the loading and the failure mode of pullout tests do not simulate the cranio-caudal in vivo loading and failure mechanism of pedicle screws. The purpose of the present study was to assess the fixation effects of different augmentation techniques (including percutaneous cement application) and to investigate pedicle screw loosening under physiological cyclic cranio-caudal loading.

Methods

Each of the two test groups consisted of 15 vertebral bodies (L1–L5, three of each level per group). Mean age was 84.3 years (SD 7.8) for group 1 and 77.0 years (SD 7.00) for group 2. Mean bone mineral density was 53.3 mg/cm³ (SD 14.1) for group 1 and 53.2 mg/cm³ (SD 4.3) for group 2. 1.5 ml high viscosity PMMA bone cement was used for all augmentation techniques. For test group 1, pedicles on the right side of the vertebrae were instrumented with solid pedicle screws in standard fashion without augmentation and served as control group. Left pedicles were instrumented with cannulated screws (Viper cannulated, DePuy Spine) and augmented. For test group 2 pedicles on the left side of the vertebrae were instrumented with cannulated fenestrated screws and in situ augmented. On the right side solid pedicle screws were augmented with cement first technique. Each screw was subjected to a cranio-caudal cyclic load starting at 20–50 N with increasing upper load magnitude of 0.1 N per cycle (1 Hz) for a maximum of 5000 cycles or until total failure. Stress X-rays were taken after cyclic loading to evaluate screw loosening.

Results

Test group 1 showed a significant higher number of load cycles until failure for augmented screws compared to the control (4030 cycles, SD 827.8 vs. 1893.3 cycles, SD 1032.1; p < 0.001). Stress X-rays revealed significant less screw toggling for the augmented screws (5.2°, SD 5.4 vs. 16.1°, SD 5.9; p < 0.001). Test group 2 showed 3653.3 (SD 934) and 3723.3 (SD 560.6) load cycles until failure for in situ and cement first augmentation. Stress X-rays revealed a screw toggling of 5.1 (SD 1.9) and 6.6 (SD 4.6) degrees for in situ and cement first augmentation techniques (p > 0.05).

Conclusion

Augmentation of pedicle screws in general significantly increased the number of load cycles and failure load comparing to the nonaugmented control group. For the augmentation technique (cement first, in situ augmented, percutaneously application) no effect could be exhibited on the failure of the pedicle screws. By the cranio-caudal cyclic loading failure of the pedicle screws occurred by screw cut through the superior endplate and the characteristic “windshield-wiper effect”, typically observed in clinical practice, could be reproduced.