The influence of lumbar vertebra and cage related factors on cage-endplate contact after lumbar interbody fusion: An in-vitro experimental study

Lumbar interbody fusion (LIF) using interbody cages is an established treatment for lumbar degenerative disc disease, but fusion results are known to be affected by risk factors such as bone mineral density (BMD), endplate geometry and cage position. At present, direct measurement of endplate-cage contact variables that affect LIF have not been fully identified. The aim of this study was to use cadaveric experiments to investigate the dependency between BMD, endplate geometry, cage parameters like type, orientation, position, and contact variables like stress and area. One vertebral body specimen from each of the five lumbar positions was harvested from five male donors. The lower half of each vertebra was potted and placed in a material testing machine (Instron 8874). A spinal cage was clamped to the machine then lowered to bring it into contact against the superior endplate. A lockable ball-joint was used to rotate the cage such that its inferior surface was congruent with the local endplate surface. A pressure sensor (Tekscan) was placed between the cage and endplate to record contact area and the peak and average contact pressures. Axial compression of 400 N was performed for five positions using a straight cage, and in one anterior position using a curved cage. The linear mixed model was utilised to perform data analyses for experimental results with statistical significance set at p < 0.05. The results indicated two trends toward significance for contact area, one for volumetric BMD (vBMD) of the vertebra (p = 0.081), and another for predicted contact area (p = 0.057). Peak contact pressure correlated significantly with vBMD (p = 0.041), and there was a trend between average contact pressure and lateral position of cage (p = 0.051). In addition, predicted contact area correlated significantly with cage orientation (p < 0.001). These results indicated that high vBMD of vertebra and a medially positioned cage led to higher contact pressures. Logically, low vBMD of vertebra and transverse cage orientation increased the contact area between the cage and endplate. In conclusion, the study identified significant influence of vBMD of vertebra, cage position and orientation on cage-endplate contact which may help to inform cage selection and design for LIF.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of the mechanical behavior of biomedical materials/Journal of mechanical behavior of biomedical materials
Published
2024-09-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2024.106754
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Spine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.27

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The influence of lumbar vertebra and cage related factors on cage-endplate contact after lumbar interbody fusion: An in-vitro experimental study

Dale L. Robinson, Peter Vee Sin Lee, David C. Ackland, Yihang Yu et al.
3 citations
Journal of the mechanical behavior of biomedical materials/Journal of mechanical behavior of biomedical materials
Spine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
1.27
article

The influence of lumbar vertebra and cage related factors on cage-endplate contact after lumbar interbody fusion: An in-vitro experimental study

Dale L. Robinson, Peter Vee Sin Lee, David C. Ackland, Yihang Yu, Yi Yang
article en
3 citations

Abstract

Lumbar interbody fusion (LIF) using interbody cages is an established treatment for lumbar degenerative disc disease, but fusion results are known to be affected by risk factors such as bone mineral density (BMD), endplate geometry and cage position. At present, direct measurement of endplate-cage contact variables that affect LIF have not been fully identified. The aim of this study was to use cadaveric experiments to investigate the dependency between BMD, endplate geometry, cage parameters like type, orientation, position, and contact variables like stress and area. One vertebral body specimen from each of the five lumbar positions was harvested from five male donors. The lower half of each vertebra was potted and placed in a material testing machine (Instron 8874). A spinal cage was clamped to the machine then lowered to bring it into contact against the superior endplate. A lockable ball-joint was used to rotate the cage such that its inferior surface was congruent with the local endplate surface. A pressure sensor (Tekscan) was placed between the cage and endplate to record contact area and the peak and average contact pressures. Axial compression of 400 N was performed for five positions using a straight cage, and in one anterior position using a curved cage. The linear mixed model was utilised to perform data analyses for experimental results with statistical significance set at p < 0.05. The results indicated two trends toward significance for contact area, one for volumetric BMD (vBMD) of the vertebra (p = 0.081), and another for predicted contact area (p = 0.057). Peak contact pressure correlated significantly with vBMD (p = 0.041), and there was a trend between average contact pressure and lateral position of cage (p = 0.051). In addition, predicted contact area correlated significantly with cage orientation (p < 0.001). These results indicated that high vBMD of vertebra and a medially positioned cage led to higher contact pressures. Logically, low vBMD of vertebra and transverse cage orientation increased the contact area between the cage and endplate. In conclusion, the study identified significant influence of vBMD of vertebra, cage position and orientation on cage-endplate contact which may help to inform cage selection and design for LIF.

Journal of the mechanical behavior of biomedical materials/Journal of mechanical behavior of biomedical materialsVol. 160
The Royal Melbourne Hospital (AU), The University of Melbourne (AU)
Australian Research Council
Openalex Percentile: Top 20%
Spine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
1.27
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.