BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The contribution of anatomical structures to the stability of the spine is of great relevance for diagnostic, prognostic and therapeutic evaluation of spinal pathologies. Although a plethora of literature is available, the contribution of anatomical structures is still not well understood. PURPOSE: We aimed to quantify the biomechanical relevance of each of the passive spinal structure trough deliberate biomechanical test series using a stepwise reduction approach on cadavers. STUDY DESIGN: Biomechanical cadaveric study. METHODS: Fifty lumbar spinal segments originating from 22 human lumbar cadavers were biomechanically tested in a displacement-controlled stepwise reduction study: the intertransverse ligaments, the supraspinous and interspinous ligaments, the facet joint capsules (FJC), the facet joints (FJ), the ligamentum flavum (LF), the posterior longitudinal ligament (PLL), and the anterior longitudinal ligament were subsequently reduced. In the intact state and after each transection step, the segments were physiologically loaded in flexion, extension, axial rotation (AR), lateral bending (LB) and with anterior (AS), posterior (PS) and lateral shear (LS). Thirty-two specimens with only minor degeneration, representing a reasonably healthy subpopulation, were selected for the here presented evaluation. Quantitative values for load and spinal level dependent contribution patterns for the anatomical structures were derived. RESULTS: Small variability between of the contribution patterns are observed. The intervertebral disc (IVD) is exposed to about 67% of the applied load in LB and during shear loading, but less by load in flexion, extension and AR (less than 35%). The FJ&FJC are the main stabilizers in AR with 49%, but provide only 10% of the stability in extension. Beside the IVD, the LF and the PLL contribute mainly in flexion (22% and 16%, respectively), while the ALL plays a major role during extension (40%) and also contributes during LB (15%). The contribution of the intertransverse ligaments and the supraspinous and interspinous ligaments are very small in all loading directions (<2% and <6%, respectively). CONCLUSION: The IVD takes the main load in LB and absorbs shear loading, while the FJ&FJC stabilize AR. The ALL resists extension while LF and PLL stabilize flexion. With the small variability of contribution patterns, suggesting distinct adaptation of the structures to one another, the biomechanical characteristics of one structure have to be put in context of the whole spinal segment.

Purpose Dorsal screw-rod instrumentations are used for a variety of spinal disorders. Cross-links (CL) can be added to such constructs, however, no clear recommendations exist. This study aims to provide an overview of the available evidence on the effectiveness of CL, potentially allowing to formulate recommendations on their use. Methods A systematic literature review was performed on PubMed and 37 original articles were included and grouped into mechanical, biomechanical, finite element and clinical studies. The change in range of motion (ROM) was analyzed in mechanical and biomechanical studies, ROM, stiffness and stress distribution were evaluated in finite element studies and clinical outcome parameters were analyzed in clinical studies. Results A relative consistent reduction in ROM in axial rotation with CL-augmentation was reported, while minor and less consistent effects were observed in flexion–extension and lateral bending. The use of CLs was clinical beneficial in C1/2 fusion, while the limited clinical studies on other anatomic regions show no significant benefit for CL-augmentation. Conclusion While CL provides some additional axial rotation stability in most situations, lateral bending and flexion–extension are less affected. Based on clinical data, CL-augmentation can only be recommended for C1/2 instrumentations, while for other cases, further clinical studies are needed to allow for evidence-based recommendations.

Background Vertebral endplate signal intensity changes visualized by magnetic resonance imaging termed Modic changes (MC) are highly prevalent in low back pain patients. Interconvertibility between the three MC subtypes (MC1, MC2, MC3) suggests different pathological stages. Histologically, granulation tissue, fibrosis, and bone marrow edema are signs of inflammation in MC1 and MC2. However, different inflammatory infiltrates and amount of fatty marrow suggest distinct inflammatory processes in MC2. Aims The aims of this study were to investigate (i) the degree of bony (BEP) and cartilage endplate (CEP) degeneration in MC2, (ii) to identify inflammatory MC2 pathomechanisms, and (iii) to show that these marrow changes correlate with severity of endplate degeneration. Methods Pairs of axial biopsies (n = 58) spanning the entire vertebral body including both CEPs were collected from human cadaveric vertebrae with MC2. From one biopsy, the bone marrow directly adjacent to the CEP was analyzed with mass spectrometry. Differentially expressed proteins (DEPs) between MC2 and control were identified and bioinformatic enrichment analysis was performed. The other biopsy was processed for paraffin histology and BEP/CEP degenerations were scored. Endplate scores were correlated with DEPs. Results Endplates from MC2 were significantly more degenerated. Proteomic analysis revealed an activated complement system, increased expression of extracellular matrix proteins, angiogenic, and neurogenic factors in MC2 marrow. Endplate scores correlated with upregulated complement and neurogenic proteins. Discussion The inflammatory pathomechanisms in MC2 comprises activation of the complement system. Concurrent inflammation, fibrosis, angiogenesis, and neurogenesis indicate that MC2 is a chronic inflammation. Correlation of endplate damage with complement and neurogenic proteins suggest that complement system activation and neoinnervation may be linked to endplate damage. The endplate-near marrow is the pathomechanistic site, because MC2 occur at locations with more endplate degeneration. Conclusion MC2 are fibroinflammatory changes with complement system involvement which occur adjacent to damaged endplates.

The cortical bone trajectory (CBT) has been introduced with the aim of better screw hold, however, screw-rod constructs with this trajectory might provide less rigidity in lateral bending (LB) and axial rotation (AR) compared to the constructs with the traditional trajectory (TT). Therefore, the addition of a horizontal cross-connector could be beneficial in counteracting this possible inferiority. The aim of this study was to compare the primary rigidity of TT with CBT screw-rod constructs and to quantify the effect of cross-connector-augmentation in both. Spines of four human cadavers (T9 –L5) were cropped into 15 functional spine units (FSU). Eight FSUs were instrumented with TT and seven FSUs with CBT pedicle screws. The segments were tested in six loading directions in three configurations: uninstrumented, instrumented with and without cross-connector. The motion between the cranial and caudal vertebra was recorded. The range of motion (ROM) between the CBT and the TT group did not differ significantly in either configuration. Cross-connector -augmentation did reduce the ROM in AR (16.3%, 0.27°, p = 0.02), LB (2.9%, 0.07°, p = 0.03) and flexion-extension FE (2.3%, 0.04°, p = 0.02) for the TT group and in AR (20.6%, 0.31°, p = 0.01) for the CBT-group. The primary rigidity of TT and CBT single level screw-rod constructs did not show significant difference. The minimal reduction of ROM due to cross-connector-augmentation seems clinically not relevant. Based on the findings of these study there is no increased necessity to use a cross-connector in a CBT-construct.

No abstract

Background Posterior lumbar instrumentation requires sufficient primary stiffness to ensure bony fusion and to avoid pseudarthrosis, screw loosening, or implant failure. To enhance primary construct stiffness, transverse cross-link (CL) connectors attached to the vertical rods can be used. Their effect on the stability of a spinal instrumentation with simultaneous decompression is yet not clear. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of CL augmentation on single-level lumbar instrumentation stiffness after gradual decompression procedures. Methods Seventeen vertebral segments (6 L1/2, 6 L3/4, 5 L5/S1) of 12 fresh-frozen human cadavers were instrumented with a transpedicular screw–rod construct following the traditional pedicle screw trajectory. Range of motion (ROM) of the segments was sequentially recorded before and after four procedures: (A) instrumented before decompression, (B) instrumented after unilateral laminotomy, (C) instrumented after midline bilateral laminotomy, and (D) instrumented after unilateral facetectomy (with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion [TLIF]). Each test was performed with and without CL augmentation. The motion between the cranial and caudal vertebrae was evaluated in all six major loading directions: flexion/extension (FE), lateral bending (LB), lateral shear (LS), anterior shear (AS), axial rotation (AR), and axial compression/distraction (AC). Results ROM was significantly reduced with CL augmentation in AR by Δ0.03–0.18° (7–12%) with a significantly higher ROM reduction after more extensive decompression. Furthermore, slight reductions in FE and LB were observed; these reached statistical significance for FE after facetectomy and TLIF insertion only (Δ0.15; 3%). The instrumentation levels did not reveal any subgroup differences. Conclusion CL augmentation reduces AR-ROM by 7–12% in single-level instrumentation of the lumbar spine, with the effect increasing along with the extensiveness of the decompression technique. In light of the discrete absolute changes, CL augmentation may be warranted for highly unstable vertebral segments rather than for standard single-level posterior spinal fusion and decompression.

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

Purpose Pedicle screw loosening is a frequent complication in lumbar spine fixation, most commonly among patients with poor bone quality. Determining patients at high risk for insufficient implant stability would allow clinicians to adapt the treatment accordingly. The aim of this study was to develop a computational model for quantitative and reliable assessment of the risk of screw loosening. Methods A cohort of patient vertebrae with diagnosed screw loosening was juxtaposed to a control group with stable fusion. Imaging data from the two cohorts were used to generate patient-specific biomechanical models of lumbar instrumented vertebral bodies. Single-level finite element models loading the screw in axial or caudo-cranial direction were generated. Further, multi-level models incorporating individualized joint loading were created. Results The simulation results indicate that there is no association between screw pull-out strength and the manifestation of implant loosening (p = 0.8). For patient models incorporating multiple instrumented vertebrae, CT-values and stress in the bone were significantly different between loose screws and non-loose screws (p = 0.017 and p = 0.029, for CT-values and stress, respectively). However, very high distinction (p = 0.001) and predictability (R2Pseudo = 0.358, AUC = 0.85) were achieved when considering the relationship between local bone strength and the predicted stress (loading factor). Screws surrounded by bone with a loading factor higher than 25% were likely to be loose, while the chances of screw loosening were close to 0 with a loading factor below 15%. Conclusion The use of a biomechanics-based score for risk assessment of implant fixation failure might represent a paradigm shift in addressing screw loosening after spondylodesis surgery.