Background: Bilateral pedicle screw (BPS) is the "gold standard" of fixation methods for patients with lumbar interbody fusion. Biomechanical deterioration initially triggers complications in the surgical segment. Studies proved that BPS positions and trajectory changes affect the local biomechanical environment. However, no study illustrates the biomechanical effect of insertional screw positions' change on the surgical segment. Methods: Oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) with different BPS insertional positions has been simulated in a well-validated lumbo-sacral model. Fixation stability and stress responses on the surgical segment were evaluated under identical loading conditions. Results: There is no clear variation tendency for the risk of BPS failure and the change of strain energy density of the grafted bone. However, shifting the insertional screw position close to the surgical segment will increase the range of motions (ROM) in the surgical segment and lead to stress concentration of bony structures, especially in the caudal side of the surgical segment. Conclusion: Adjusting the insertional position of BPS close to the surgical segment in OLIF models will lead to stress concentration of bony structures and surgical segmental instability. Therefore, reducing BPS's fixation length was not recommended, which may increase the risk of segmental instability, non-union, and cage subsidence.

Background Cage subsidence causes poor prognoses in patients treated by oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF). Deterioration of the biomechanical environment initially triggers cage subsidence, and patients with low bone mineral density (BMD) suffer a higher risk of cage subsidence. However, whether low BMD increases the risk of cage subsidence by deteriorating the local biomechanical environment has not been clearly identified. Methods OLIF without additional fixation (stand-alone, S-A) and with different additional fixation devices (AFDs), including anterolateral single rod screws (ALSRs) and bilateral pedicle screws (BPSs) fixation, was simulated in the L4-L5 segment of a well-validated finite element model. The biomechanical effects of different BMDs were investigated by adjusting the material properties of bony structures. Biomechanical indicators related to cage subsidence were computed and recorded under different directional moments. Results Overall, low BMD triggers stress concentration in surgical segment, the highest equivalent stress can be observed in osteoporosis models under most loading conditions. Compared with the flexion-extension loading condition, this variation tendency was more pronounced under bending and rotation loading conditions. In addition, AFDs obviously reduced the stress concentration on both bony endplates and the OLIF cage, and the maximum stress on ALSRs was evidently higher than that on BPSs under almost all loading conditions. Conclusions Stepwise reduction of BMD increases the risk of a poor local biomechanical environment in OLIF patients, and regular anti-osteoporosis therapy should be considered an effective method to biomechanically optimize the prognosis of OLIF patients.

BackgroundThe fixation-induced biomechanical deterioration will increase the risk of adjacent segment diseases (ASD) after lumbar interbody fusion with Bilateral pedicle screw (BPS) fixation. The accurate adjustment of insertional pedicle screw positions is possible, and published studies have reported its mechanical effects. However, no studies clarified that adjusting insertional screw positions would affect the postoperative biomechanical environment and the risk of ASD. The objective of this study was to identify this issue and provide theoretical references for the optimization of insertional pedicle screw position selections.MethodsThe oblique lumbar interbody fusion fixed by BPS with different insertional positions has been simulated in the L4-L5 segment of our previously constructed and validated lumbosacral model. Biomechanical indicators related to ASD have been computed and recorded under flexion, extension, bending, and axial rotation loading conditions.ResultsThe change of screw insertional positions has more apparent biomechanical effects on the cranial than the caudal segment. Positive collections can be observed between the reduction of the fixation length and the alleviation of motility compensation and stress concentration on facet cartilages. By contrast, no pronounced tendency of stress distribution on the intervertebral discs can be observed with the change of screw positions.ConclusionsReducing the fixation stiffness by adjusting the insertional screw positions could alleviate the biomechanical deterioration and be an effective method to reduce the risk of ASD caused by BPS.