Detailed Information

Cited 0 time in webofscience Cited 0 time in scopus
Metadata Downloads

Effects of the Level of Mono-Segmental Dynamic Stabilization on the Whole Lumbar Spine

Authors
Choi, Hae WonKim, Young EunChae, Soo-Won
Issue Date
May-2016
Publisher
KOREAN SOC PRECISION ENG
Keywords
Finite element spine model; Dynamic stabilization; Fusion; Instrumentation level; Adjacent segment degeneration
Citation
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PRECISION ENGINEERING AND MANUFACTURING, v.17, no.5, pp.603 - 611
Indexed
SCIE
SCOPUS
KCI
Journal Title
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PRECISION ENGINEERING AND MANUFACTURING
Volume
17
Number
5
Start Page
603
End Page
611
URI
https://scholar.korea.ac.kr/handle/2021.sw.korea/88708
DOI
10.1007/s12541-016-0073-1
ISSN
2234-7593
Abstract
Little biomechanical data has been gathered for the biomechanical effects of pedicle-based dynamic stabilization system (PBDS) and fusion (a conventional titanium rod and cage) to the whole lumbar spine according to the instrumentation level. A previously validated three-dimensional, intact osteoligamentous L1-S1 finite element model was modified to incorporate three different PBDS (Dynesys, Nflex, or PEEK) and fusion at three different levels (L3-L4, L4-L5, and L5-S1). A new loading method that can create the segmental motion similar to an in-vivo measurement was applied to the model. The biomechanical changes in the stabilized models were compared with those of the intact model during sagittal plane motion. The simulation results demonstrated that Dynesys generated relatively larger motion when it was instrumented at the L3-L4 segment, whereas the Nflex was the most appropriate device for L4-L5 stabilization. Depending on the stabilization device and instrumented level, whole-lumbar segmental motion also varied. During flexion, stabilization at the L3-L4 level or L4-L5 level produced a relatively higher increase in the motion at all cranial levels. Stabilization at the L5-S1 level generated a slight decrease in the motion at the adjacent cranial level without respect to the type of fixation. In cases of fusion, the change in the motion was higher relative to that with PBDS. Given the biomechanical change at each level after stabilization, adjacent segment degeneration was expected cranially rather caudally, and the probability of this degeneration differed depending on the stabilization level and device.
Files in This Item
There are no files associated with this item.
Appears in
Collections
College of Engineering > Department of Mechanical Engineering > 1. Journal Articles

qrcode

Items in ScholarWorks are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Altmetrics

Total Views & Downloads

BROWSE