TY - JOUR
T1 - A novel anchoring system for use in a nonfusion scoliosis correction device
AU - Wessels, Martijn
AU - Homminga, Jasper Johan
AU - Hekman, Edsko E.G.
AU - Verkerke, Gijsbertus Jacob
PY - 2014
Y1 - 2014
N2 - Background context
Insertion of a pedicle screw in the mid- and high thoracic regions has a serious risk of facet joint damage. Because flexible implant systems require intact facet joints, we developed an enhanced fixation that is less destructive to spinal structures. The XSFIX is a posterior fixation system that uses cables that are attached to the transverse processes of a vertebra.
Purpose
To determine whether a fixation to the transverse process using the XSFIX is strong enough to withstand the loads applied by the XSLATOR (a novel, highly flexible nonfusion implant system) and thus, whether it is a suitable alternative for pedicle screw fixation.
Study design
The strength of a novel fixation system using transverse process cables was determined and compared with the strength of a similar fixation using polyaxial pedicle screws on different vertebral levels.
Methods
Each of the 58 vertebrae, isolated from four adult human cadavers, was instrumented with either a pedicle screw anchor (PSA) system or a prototype of the XSFIX. The PSA consisted of two polyaxial pedicle screws and a 5 mm diameter rod. The XSFIX prototype consisted of two bodies that were fixed to the transverse processes, interconnected with a similar rod. Each fixation system was subjected to a lateral or an axial torque.
Results
The PSA demonstrated fixation strength in lateral loading and torsion higher than required for use in the XSLATOR. The XSFIX demonstrated high enough fixation strength (in both lateral loading and torsion), only in the high and midthoracic regions (T10–T12).
Conclusions
This experiment showed that the fixation strength of XSFIX is sufficient for use with the XSLATOR only in mid- and high thoracic regions. For the low thoracic and lumbar region, the PSA is a more rigid fixation. Because the performance of the new fixation system appears to be favorable in the high and midthoracic regions, a clinical study is the next challenge.
AB - Background context
Insertion of a pedicle screw in the mid- and high thoracic regions has a serious risk of facet joint damage. Because flexible implant systems require intact facet joints, we developed an enhanced fixation that is less destructive to spinal structures. The XSFIX is a posterior fixation system that uses cables that are attached to the transverse processes of a vertebra.
Purpose
To determine whether a fixation to the transverse process using the XSFIX is strong enough to withstand the loads applied by the XSLATOR (a novel, highly flexible nonfusion implant system) and thus, whether it is a suitable alternative for pedicle screw fixation.
Study design
The strength of a novel fixation system using transverse process cables was determined and compared with the strength of a similar fixation using polyaxial pedicle screws on different vertebral levels.
Methods
Each of the 58 vertebrae, isolated from four adult human cadavers, was instrumented with either a pedicle screw anchor (PSA) system or a prototype of the XSFIX. The PSA consisted of two polyaxial pedicle screws and a 5 mm diameter rod. The XSFIX prototype consisted of two bodies that were fixed to the transverse processes, interconnected with a similar rod. Each fixation system was subjected to a lateral or an axial torque.
Results
The PSA demonstrated fixation strength in lateral loading and torsion higher than required for use in the XSLATOR. The XSFIX demonstrated high enough fixation strength (in both lateral loading and torsion), only in the high and midthoracic regions (T10–T12).
Conclusions
This experiment showed that the fixation strength of XSFIX is sufficient for use with the XSLATOR only in mid- and high thoracic regions. For the low thoracic and lumbar region, the PSA is a more rigid fixation. Because the performance of the new fixation system appears to be favorable in the high and midthoracic regions, a clinical study is the next challenge.
KW - METIS-307731
KW - IR-96642
U2 - 10.1016/j.spinee.2014.04.028
DO - 10.1016/j.spinee.2014.04.028
M3 - Article
VL - 14
SP - 2740
EP - 2747
JO - Spine journal
JF - Spine journal
SN - 1529-9430
IS - 11
ER -