Can a novel rectangular footplate provide higher resistance to subsidence than circular footplates? An ex vivo biomechanical study

Ex vivo biomechanical evaluation using cadaveric vertebral bodies. To compare the subsidence characteristics of a novel rectangular footplate design with a conventional circular footplate design. Cage subsidence is a postoperative complication after reconstruction of corpectomy defects in the thorac...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Spine (Philadelphia, Pa. 1976) Pa. 1976), 2012-09, Vol.37 (19), p.E1177-E1181
Hauptverfasser: Pekmezci, Murat, McDonald, Erik, Kennedy, Abbey, Dedini, Russell, McClellan, Trigg, Ames, Christopher, Deviren, Vedat
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page E1181
container_issue 19
container_start_page E1177
container_title Spine (Philadelphia, Pa. 1976)
container_volume 37
creator Pekmezci, Murat
McDonald, Erik
Kennedy, Abbey
Dedini, Russell
McClellan, Trigg
Ames, Christopher
Deviren, Vedat
description Ex vivo biomechanical evaluation using cadaveric vertebral bodies. To compare the subsidence characteristics of a novel rectangular footplate design with a conventional circular footplate design. Cage subsidence is a postoperative complication after reconstruction of corpectomy defects in the thoracolumbar spine and depends on factors, such as bone quality, adjunctive fixation, and the relationship between the footplate on the cage and the vertebral body endplate. Twenty-four cadaveric vertebrae (T12-L5) were disarticulated, potted in a commercial resin, loaded with either a circular or a rectangular footplate, and tested in a servo hydraulic testing machine. Twelve vertebral bodies were loaded with a circular footplate, and after subsidence the same vertebral bodies were loaded with a rectangular footplate. The second set of 12 vertebral bodies was loaded with a rectangular footplate only. Force-displacement curves were developed for the 3 groups, and the ultimate load to failure and stiffness values were calculated. The ultimate load to failure with the circular footplate was 1310 N (SD, 482). The ultimate load to failure with a rectangular footplate with a central defect and without a central defect was 1636 N (SD, 513) and 2481 N (SD, 1191), respectively. The stiffness of the constructs with circular footplate was 473 N/mm (SD, 205). The stiffness of the constructs with a rectangular footplate with a central defect and without a central defect was 754 N/mm (SD, 217) and 1054 N/mm (SD, 329), respectively. A rectangular footplate design is more resistant to subsidence than a circular footplate design in an ex vivo biomechanical model. The new design had higher load to failure even in the presence of a central defect. These findings suggest that rectangular footplates may provide better subsidence resistance when used to reconstruct defects after thoracolumbar corpectomy.
doi_str_mv 10.1097/brs.0b013e3182647c0b
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1037658376</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1037658376</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-cbf22a1c7b46584a9bee9c4e5afeedf4f83b33bc8a9c413c3f92fd65af3380563</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkEtLAzEUhYMotj7-gUiWbkaT3HmupBZfUBB8rIckc2Mj00lNZord-suNWgXdJOSe75xLDiFHnJ1yVhVnyodTphgHBF6KPC00U1tkzDNRJpxn1TYZM8hFIlLIR2QvhBfGWA682iUjIYroEfmYvE9lRyXt3Apb6lH3snseWumpca5ftrJHuvRuZRukc_s8Rx-hYEPENNLe0TCoEMWv1zxGaev1X384p5OO4htd2ZWjyroF6khaLVsa-qFZH5AdI9uAh5t7nzxdXT5Ob5LZ3fXtdDJLNBTQJ1oZISTXhUrzrExlpRArnWImDWJjUlOCAlC6lHHKQYOphGnyKAOULMthn5x858YPvQ4Y-nphg8a2lR26IdScQRGT4xHR9BvV3oXg0dRLbxfSryNUf7ZfX9w_1P_bj7bjzYZBLbD5Nf3UDR-wDYWI</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1037658376</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Can a novel rectangular footplate provide higher resistance to subsidence than circular footplates? An ex vivo biomechanical study</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Journals@Ovid Ovid Autoload</source><creator>Pekmezci, Murat ; McDonald, Erik ; Kennedy, Abbey ; Dedini, Russell ; McClellan, Trigg ; Ames, Christopher ; Deviren, Vedat</creator><creatorcontrib>Pekmezci, Murat ; McDonald, Erik ; Kennedy, Abbey ; Dedini, Russell ; McClellan, Trigg ; Ames, Christopher ; Deviren, Vedat</creatorcontrib><description>Ex vivo biomechanical evaluation using cadaveric vertebral bodies. To compare the subsidence characteristics of a novel rectangular footplate design with a conventional circular footplate design. Cage subsidence is a postoperative complication after reconstruction of corpectomy defects in the thoracolumbar spine and depends on factors, such as bone quality, adjunctive fixation, and the relationship between the footplate on the cage and the vertebral body endplate. Twenty-four cadaveric vertebrae (T12-L5) were disarticulated, potted in a commercial resin, loaded with either a circular or a rectangular footplate, and tested in a servo hydraulic testing machine. Twelve vertebral bodies were loaded with a circular footplate, and after subsidence the same vertebral bodies were loaded with a rectangular footplate. The second set of 12 vertebral bodies was loaded with a rectangular footplate only. Force-displacement curves were developed for the 3 groups, and the ultimate load to failure and stiffness values were calculated. The ultimate load to failure with the circular footplate was 1310 N (SD, 482). The ultimate load to failure with a rectangular footplate with a central defect and without a central defect was 1636 N (SD, 513) and 2481 N (SD, 1191), respectively. The stiffness of the constructs with circular footplate was 473 N/mm (SD, 205). The stiffness of the constructs with a rectangular footplate with a central defect and without a central defect was 754 N/mm (SD, 217) and 1054 N/mm (SD, 329), respectively. A rectangular footplate design is more resistant to subsidence than a circular footplate design in an ex vivo biomechanical model. The new design had higher load to failure even in the presence of a central defect. These findings suggest that rectangular footplates may provide better subsidence resistance when used to reconstruct defects after thoracolumbar corpectomy.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0362-2436</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1528-1159</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1097/brs.0b013e3182647c0b</identifier><identifier>PMID: 22718226</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States</publisher><subject>Adult ; Biomechanical Phenomena ; Bone Density ; Compressive Strength ; Equipment Design ; Equipment Failure ; Female ; Humans ; Implants, Experimental ; Internal Fixators ; Lumbar Vertebrae - surgery ; Male ; Materials Testing ; Stress, Mechanical ; Thoracic Vertebrae - surgery ; Weight-Bearing</subject><ispartof>Spine (Philadelphia, Pa. 1976), 2012-09, Vol.37 (19), p.E1177-E1181</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-cbf22a1c7b46584a9bee9c4e5afeedf4f83b33bc8a9c413c3f92fd65af3380563</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-cbf22a1c7b46584a9bee9c4e5afeedf4f83b33bc8a9c413c3f92fd65af3380563</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,27929,27930</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22718226$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Pekmezci, Murat</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McDonald, Erik</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kennedy, Abbey</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dedini, Russell</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McClellan, Trigg</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ames, Christopher</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Deviren, Vedat</creatorcontrib><title>Can a novel rectangular footplate provide higher resistance to subsidence than circular footplates? An ex vivo biomechanical study</title><title>Spine (Philadelphia, Pa. 1976)</title><addtitle>Spine (Phila Pa 1976)</addtitle><description>Ex vivo biomechanical evaluation using cadaveric vertebral bodies. To compare the subsidence characteristics of a novel rectangular footplate design with a conventional circular footplate design. Cage subsidence is a postoperative complication after reconstruction of corpectomy defects in the thoracolumbar spine and depends on factors, such as bone quality, adjunctive fixation, and the relationship between the footplate on the cage and the vertebral body endplate. Twenty-four cadaveric vertebrae (T12-L5) were disarticulated, potted in a commercial resin, loaded with either a circular or a rectangular footplate, and tested in a servo hydraulic testing machine. Twelve vertebral bodies were loaded with a circular footplate, and after subsidence the same vertebral bodies were loaded with a rectangular footplate. The second set of 12 vertebral bodies was loaded with a rectangular footplate only. Force-displacement curves were developed for the 3 groups, and the ultimate load to failure and stiffness values were calculated. The ultimate load to failure with the circular footplate was 1310 N (SD, 482). The ultimate load to failure with a rectangular footplate with a central defect and without a central defect was 1636 N (SD, 513) and 2481 N (SD, 1191), respectively. The stiffness of the constructs with circular footplate was 473 N/mm (SD, 205). The stiffness of the constructs with a rectangular footplate with a central defect and without a central defect was 754 N/mm (SD, 217) and 1054 N/mm (SD, 329), respectively. A rectangular footplate design is more resistant to subsidence than a circular footplate design in an ex vivo biomechanical model. The new design had higher load to failure even in the presence of a central defect. These findings suggest that rectangular footplates may provide better subsidence resistance when used to reconstruct defects after thoracolumbar corpectomy.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Biomechanical Phenomena</subject><subject>Bone Density</subject><subject>Compressive Strength</subject><subject>Equipment Design</subject><subject>Equipment Failure</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Implants, Experimental</subject><subject>Internal Fixators</subject><subject>Lumbar Vertebrae - surgery</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Materials Testing</subject><subject>Stress, Mechanical</subject><subject>Thoracic Vertebrae - surgery</subject><subject>Weight-Bearing</subject><issn>0362-2436</issn><issn>1528-1159</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkEtLAzEUhYMotj7-gUiWbkaT3HmupBZfUBB8rIckc2Mj00lNZord-suNWgXdJOSe75xLDiFHnJ1yVhVnyodTphgHBF6KPC00U1tkzDNRJpxn1TYZM8hFIlLIR2QvhBfGWA682iUjIYroEfmYvE9lRyXt3Apb6lH3snseWumpca5ftrJHuvRuZRukc_s8Rx-hYEPENNLe0TCoEMWv1zxGaev1X384p5OO4htd2ZWjyroF6khaLVsa-qFZH5AdI9uAh5t7nzxdXT5Ob5LZ3fXtdDJLNBTQJ1oZISTXhUrzrExlpRArnWImDWJjUlOCAlC6lHHKQYOphGnyKAOULMthn5x858YPvQ4Y-nphg8a2lR26IdScQRGT4xHR9BvV3oXg0dRLbxfSryNUf7ZfX9w_1P_bj7bjzYZBLbD5Nf3UDR-wDYWI</recordid><startdate>20120901</startdate><enddate>20120901</enddate><creator>Pekmezci, Murat</creator><creator>McDonald, Erik</creator><creator>Kennedy, Abbey</creator><creator>Dedini, Russell</creator><creator>McClellan, Trigg</creator><creator>Ames, Christopher</creator><creator>Deviren, Vedat</creator><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20120901</creationdate><title>Can a novel rectangular footplate provide higher resistance to subsidence than circular footplates? An ex vivo biomechanical study</title><author>Pekmezci, Murat ; McDonald, Erik ; Kennedy, Abbey ; Dedini, Russell ; McClellan, Trigg ; Ames, Christopher ; Deviren, Vedat</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-cbf22a1c7b46584a9bee9c4e5afeedf4f83b33bc8a9c413c3f92fd65af3380563</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Biomechanical Phenomena</topic><topic>Bone Density</topic><topic>Compressive Strength</topic><topic>Equipment Design</topic><topic>Equipment Failure</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Implants, Experimental</topic><topic>Internal Fixators</topic><topic>Lumbar Vertebrae - surgery</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Materials Testing</topic><topic>Stress, Mechanical</topic><topic>Thoracic Vertebrae - surgery</topic><topic>Weight-Bearing</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Pekmezci, Murat</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McDonald, Erik</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kennedy, Abbey</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dedini, Russell</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McClellan, Trigg</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ames, Christopher</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Deviren, Vedat</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Spine (Philadelphia, Pa. 1976)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Pekmezci, Murat</au><au>McDonald, Erik</au><au>Kennedy, Abbey</au><au>Dedini, Russell</au><au>McClellan, Trigg</au><au>Ames, Christopher</au><au>Deviren, Vedat</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Can a novel rectangular footplate provide higher resistance to subsidence than circular footplates? An ex vivo biomechanical study</atitle><jtitle>Spine (Philadelphia, Pa. 1976)</jtitle><addtitle>Spine (Phila Pa 1976)</addtitle><date>2012-09-01</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>37</volume><issue>19</issue><spage>E1177</spage><epage>E1181</epage><pages>E1177-E1181</pages><issn>0362-2436</issn><eissn>1528-1159</eissn><abstract>Ex vivo biomechanical evaluation using cadaveric vertebral bodies. To compare the subsidence characteristics of a novel rectangular footplate design with a conventional circular footplate design. Cage subsidence is a postoperative complication after reconstruction of corpectomy defects in the thoracolumbar spine and depends on factors, such as bone quality, adjunctive fixation, and the relationship between the footplate on the cage and the vertebral body endplate. Twenty-four cadaveric vertebrae (T12-L5) were disarticulated, potted in a commercial resin, loaded with either a circular or a rectangular footplate, and tested in a servo hydraulic testing machine. Twelve vertebral bodies were loaded with a circular footplate, and after subsidence the same vertebral bodies were loaded with a rectangular footplate. The second set of 12 vertebral bodies was loaded with a rectangular footplate only. Force-displacement curves were developed for the 3 groups, and the ultimate load to failure and stiffness values were calculated. The ultimate load to failure with the circular footplate was 1310 N (SD, 482). The ultimate load to failure with a rectangular footplate with a central defect and without a central defect was 1636 N (SD, 513) and 2481 N (SD, 1191), respectively. The stiffness of the constructs with circular footplate was 473 N/mm (SD, 205). The stiffness of the constructs with a rectangular footplate with a central defect and without a central defect was 754 N/mm (SD, 217) and 1054 N/mm (SD, 329), respectively. A rectangular footplate design is more resistant to subsidence than a circular footplate design in an ex vivo biomechanical model. The new design had higher load to failure even in the presence of a central defect. These findings suggest that rectangular footplates may provide better subsidence resistance when used to reconstruct defects after thoracolumbar corpectomy.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pmid>22718226</pmid><doi>10.1097/brs.0b013e3182647c0b</doi></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0362-2436
ispartof Spine (Philadelphia, Pa. 1976), 2012-09, Vol.37 (19), p.E1177-E1181
issn 0362-2436
1528-1159
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1037658376
source MEDLINE; Journals@Ovid Ovid Autoload
subjects Adult
Biomechanical Phenomena
Bone Density
Compressive Strength
Equipment Design
Equipment Failure
Female
Humans
Implants, Experimental
Internal Fixators
Lumbar Vertebrae - surgery
Male
Materials Testing
Stress, Mechanical
Thoracic Vertebrae - surgery
Weight-Bearing
title Can a novel rectangular footplate provide higher resistance to subsidence than circular footplates? An ex vivo biomechanical study
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-14T06%3A10%3A50IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Can%20a%20novel%20rectangular%20footplate%20provide%20higher%20resistance%20to%20subsidence%20than%20circular%20footplates?%20An%20ex%20vivo%20biomechanical%20study&rft.jtitle=Spine%20(Philadelphia,%20Pa.%201976)&rft.au=Pekmezci,%20Murat&rft.date=2012-09-01&rft.volume=37&rft.issue=19&rft.spage=E1177&rft.epage=E1181&rft.pages=E1177-E1181&rft.issn=0362-2436&rft.eissn=1528-1159&rft_id=info:doi/10.1097/brs.0b013e3182647c0b&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1037658376%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1037658376&rft_id=info:pmid/22718226&rfr_iscdi=true