journal article·2023-02-17Open access

Effect of Interbody Implants on the Biomechanical Behavior of Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Finite Element Study

Hangkai Shen, Jia Zhu, Chenhui Huang, Dingding Xiang, Weiqiang Liu

Abstract

Porous titanium interbody scaffolds are growing in popularity due to their appealing advantages for bone ingrowth. This study aimed to investigate the biomechanical effects of scaffold materials in both normal and osteoporotic lumbar spines using a finite element (FE) model. Four scaffold materials were compared: Ti6Al4V (Ti), PEEK, porous titanium of 65% porosity (P65), and porous titanium of 80% porosity (P80). In addition, the range of motion (ROM), endplate stress, scaffold stress, and pedicle screw stress were calculated and compared. The results showed that the ROM decreased by more than 96% after surgery, and the solid Ti scaffold provided the lowest ROM (1.2–3.4% of the intact case) at the surgical segment among all models. Compared to solid Ti, PEEK decreased the scaffold stress by 53–66 and the endplate stress by 0–33%, while porous Ti decreased the scaffold stress by 20–32% and the endplate stress by 0–32%. Further, compared with P65, P80 slightly increased the ROM (<0.03°) and pedicle screw stress (<4%) and decreased the endplate stress by 0–13% and scaffold stress by approximately 18%. Moreover, the osteoporotic lumbar spine provided higher ROMs, endplate stresses, scaffold stresses, and pedicle screw stresses in all motion modes. The porous Ti scaffolds may offer an alternative for lateral lumbar interbody fusion.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Spine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology · Orthopaedic implants and arthroplasty · Bone Tissue Engineering Materials

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

China United Engineering Corporation, Hangzhou 310000, China

Tsinghua Shenzhen International Graduate School, Tsinghua University, Shenzhen 518055, China

School of Mechanical Engineering and Automation, Northeastern University, Shenyang 110057, China

State Key Laboratory of Tribology in Advanced Equipment, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China

Funding

Guangdong Basic and Applied Basic Research Foundation · China Postdoctoral Science Foundation · Liaoning Province Natural Science Foundation · Tribology Science Fund of the State Key Laboratory of Tribology

References (41)

Show source-provided references
1. Titanium (Ti) scaffolds may be superior to polyetheretherketone (PEEK) scaffolds in lumbar interbody fusion: A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical and radiological outcomes of spinal interbody fusions using Ti versus PEEK scaffolds10.1007/s00586-021-06748-w ↗
2. Biomechanics of Lumbar Cortical Screw-Rod Fixation Versus Pedicle Screw-Rod Fixation with and Without Interbody Support10.1097/BRS.0b013e318279a95e ↗
3. Polyetheretherketone Versus Titanium Scaffolds for Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Meta-Analysis and Review of the Literature10.14245/ns.2040058.029 ↗
4. Relationship between the elastic modulus of the scaffold material and the biomechanical properties of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: A logarithmic regression analysis based on parametric finite element simulations10.1016/j.cmpb.2021.106570 ↗
5. Titanium vs. polyetheretherketone (PEEK) interbody fusion: Meta-analysis and review of the literature10.1016/j.jocn.2017.06.062 ↗
6. P LIF surgery with titanium-coated PEEK or uncoated PEEK scaffolds: A prospective randomised clinical and radiological study10.1007/s00586-020-06642-x ↗
7. Osteoblasts exhibit a more differentiated phenotype and increased bone morphogenetic protein production on titanium alloy substrates than on poly-ether-ether-ketone10.1016/j.spinee.2012.02.002 ↗
8. Computational comparison of three different scaffold porosities in posterior lumbar interbody fusion with porous scaffold10.1016/j.compbiomed.2021.105036 ↗
9. Porous fusion scaffold design via integrated global-local topology optimization and biomechanical analysis of performance10.1016/j.jmbbm.2020.103982 ↗
10. Computational comparison of three posterior lumbar interbody fusion techniques by using porous titanium interbody scaffolds with 50% porosity10.1016/j.compbiomed.2016.01.024 ↗
11. Biomechanical changes at the adjacent segments induced by a lordotic porous interbody fusion scaffold10.1016/j.compbiomed.2022.105320 ↗
12. Impact of mechanical stability on the progress of bone ongrowth on the frame surfaces of a titanium-coated PEEK scaffold and a 3D porous titanium alloy scaffold: In vivo analysis using CT color mapping10.1007/s00586-020-06673-4 ↗
13. Finite element study on the influence of pore size and structure on stress shielding effect of additive manufactured spinal scaffold10.1080/10255842.2021.1970142 ↗
14. Pore size of porous hydroxyapatite as the cell-substratum controls BMP-induced osteogenesis10.1093/oxfordjournals.jbchem.a021589 ↗
15. Biomechanical investigation into the structural design of porous additive manufactured scaffolds using numerical and experimental approaches10.1016/j.compbiomed.2016.06.016 ↗
16. Advances in pathogenesis and therapeutic strategies for osteoporosis10.1016/j.pharmthera.2022.108168 ↗
17. Analysis of the physiological load on lumbar vertebrae in patients with osteoporosis: A finite-element study10.1038/s41598-022-15241-3 ↗
18. Biomechanical Evaluation of Stand-Alone Oblique Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Under 3 Different Bone Mineral Density Conditions: A Finite Element Analysis10.1016/j.wneu.2021.08.049 ↗
19. Osteoporosis in men: Findings from the Osteoporotic Fractures in Men Study (MrOS)10.1177/1759720X15621227 ↗
20. Biomechanical Evaluation of Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Coflex-F and Pedicle Screw Fixation: Finite Element Analysis of Static and Vibration Conditions10.1111/os.13425 ↗
21. Biomechanical Effects of the Geometry of Ball-and-Socket Artificial Disc on Lumbar Spine10.1097/BRS.0000000000001789 ↗
22. Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Versus Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Finite Element Analysis of the Vibration Characteristics of Fused Lumbar Spine10.1016/j.wneu.2021.02.094 ↗
23. Biomechanical Analysis of Porous Additive Manufactured Scaffolds for Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Finite Element Analysis10.1016/j.wneu.2017.12.127 ↗
24. Finite element model predicts the biomechanical performance of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with various porous additive manufactured scaffolds10.1016/j.compbiomed.2018.02.016 ↗
25. Biomechanical analysis of lumbar interbody fusion supplemented with various posterior stabilization systems10.1007/s00586-021-06856-7 ↗
26. Novel model to analyze the effect of a large compressive follower pre-load on range of motions in a lumbar spine10.1016/j.jbiomech.2006.05.019 ↗
27. Biomechanical role of cement augmentation in the vibration characteristics of the osteoporotic lumbar spine after lumbar interbody fusion10.1007/s10856-022-06671-6 ↗
28. Biomechanical role of osteoporosis affects the incidence of adjacent segment disease after percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy10.1186/s13018-019-1166-1 ↗
29. Liu, Z.-X., Gao, Z.-W., Chen, C., Liu, Z.-Y., Cai, X.-Y., Ren, Y.-N., Sun, X., Ma, X.-L., Du, C.-F., and Yang, Q. (2022). Effects of osteoporosis on the biomechanics of various supplemental fixations co-applied with oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF): A finite element analysis. BMC Musculoskelet. Disord., 23.10.1186/s12891-022-05645-7 ↗
30. Liu, X., Ma, J., Park, P., Huang, X., Xie, N., and Ye, X. (2017). Biomechanical comparison of multilevel lateral interbody fusion with and without supplementary instrumentation: A three-dimensional finite element study. BMC Musculoskelet. Disord., 18.10.1186/s12891-017-1387-6 ↗
31. Effect of Osteoporosis on Morphology and Mobility of the Lumbar Spine10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181895aca ↗
32. Biomechanical analysis of segmental lumbar lordosis and risk of scaffold subsidence with different scaffold heights and alternative placements in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion10.1080/10255842.2020.1737027 ↗
33. Analysis of stress and stabilization in adolescent with osteoporotic idiopathic scoliosis: Finite element method10.1080/10255842.2022.2044803 ↗
34. Stress analysis of the implants in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion under static and vibration loadings: A comparison between pedicle screw fixation system with rigid and flexible rods10.1007/s10856-019-6320-0 ↗
35. Characteristics and Efficacy of a New 3-Dimensional Printed Mesh Structure Titanium Alloy Spacer for Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion10.3928/01477447-20170810-04 ↗
36. Early Outcomes of Three-Dimensional–Printed Porous Titanium versus Polyetheretherketone Cage Implantation for Stand-Alone Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion in the Treatment of Symptomatic Adjacent Segment Degeneration10.1016/j.wneu.2021.11.122 ↗
37. Tsai, P.I., Wu, M.H., Li, Y.Y., Lin, T.H., Tsai, J.S.C., Huang, H.I., Lai, H.J., Lee, M.H., and Chen, C.Y. (2021). Additive-manufactured Ti-6Al-4V/Polyetheretherketone composite porous cage for Interbody fusion: Bone growth and biocompatibility evaluation in a porcine model. BMC Musculoskelet. Disord., 22.10.1186/s12891-021-04022-0 ↗
38. Bony ingrowth potential of 3D-printed porous titanium alloy: A direct comparison of interbody cage materials in an in vivo ovine lumbar fusion model10.1016/j.spinee.2018.02.018 ↗
39. Can activated titanium interbody cages accelerate or enhance spinal fusion? A review of the literature and a design for clinical trials10.1007/s10856-021-06628-1 ↗
40. Adjacent segment disease after lumbar or lumbosacral fusion: Review of the literature10.1097/01.brs.0000137069.88904.03 ↗
41. Dynamic Response of the Lumbar Spine to Whole-body Vibration Under a Compressive Follower Preload10.1097/BRS.0000000000002247 ↗