0 398

Cited 9 times in

Biomechanical comparison of cervical discectomy/fusion model using allograft spacers between anterior and posterior fixation methods (lateral mass and pedicle screw)

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.author문성환-
dc.contributor.author이병호-
dc.contributor.author이환모-
dc.date.accessioned2020-12-01T18:00:01Z-
dc.date.available2020-12-01T18:00:01Z-
dc.date.issued2020-03-
dc.identifier.issn0268-0033-
dc.identifier.urihttps://ir.ymlib.yonsei.ac.kr/handle/22282913/180547-
dc.description.abstractBackground: The purpose of this study is to investigate effects of different fixation methods on the physical stress on allospacers, endplate-vertebral body, and implants using finite element model analyses. Methods: Stress distribution and subsidence risk according to the fixation methods under the condition of hybrid motion control were analyzed. The detailed finite element model of a previously validated, three-dimensional, intact cervical spinal segment model, with C5-C6 segmental fusion using allospacer, was used to evaluate the biomechanical characteristics of different fixation combinations, such as anterior plate/screws, lateral mass screw, and posterior pedicle screw. Findings: The load sharing on allospacers increased in extension in order of posterior pedicle screws (21.4%), lateral mass screws (31.5%), and anterior plate/screws (56.6%). lateral mass screw demonstrated the highest load sharing (68.1%) on the allospacer in flexion. The Peak von Mises stress of the allospacer was the lowest in flexion and axial rotation but the highest in extension with anterior plate/screws. Allospacer subsidence risk was the lowest in extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation with posterior pedicle screws but the lowest in flexion with anterior plate/screws. The bone-screw loosening risk was the lowest in all modes with posterior pedicle screws but the highest with anterior plate/screws. Interpretation: Posterior pedicle screws demonstrated the best mechanical stability of allospacer failure-subsidence and the lowest risk of screw loosening. Different motion restrictions depending on the fixation method should be considered for implant and allospacer safety.-
dc.description.statementOfResponsibilityrestriction-
dc.languageEnglish-
dc.publisherElsevier Science-
dc.relation.isPartOfCLINICAL BIOMECHANICS-
dc.rightsCC BY-NC-ND 2.0 KR-
dc.titleBiomechanical comparison of cervical discectomy/fusion model using allograft spacers between anterior and posterior fixation methods (lateral mass and pedicle screw)-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.contributor.collegeCollege of Medicine (의과대학)-
dc.contributor.departmentDept. of Orthopedic Surgery (정형외과학교실)-
dc.contributor.googleauthorJi-Won Kwon-
dc.contributor.googleauthorSun Hee Bang-
dc.contributor.googleauthorTae Hyun Park-
dc.contributor.googleauthorSung-Jae Lee-
dc.contributor.googleauthorHwan-Mo Lee-
dc.contributor.googleauthorSoo-Bin Lee-
dc.contributor.googleauthorByung Ho Lee-
dc.contributor.googleauthorSeong-Hwan Moon-
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2020.01.018-
dc.contributor.localIdA01365-
dc.contributor.localIdA02801-
dc.contributor.localIdA03333-
dc.relation.journalcodeJ03918-
dc.identifier.eissn1879-1271-
dc.identifier.pmid32062472-
dc.identifier.urlhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0268003320300449-
dc.subject.keywordACDF-
dc.subject.keywordAllospacer-
dc.subject.keywordFinite element model-
dc.subject.keywordLateral mass screw-
dc.subject.keywordPedicle screw-
dc.contributor.alternativeNameMoon, Seong Hwan-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor문성환-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor이병호-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor이환모-
dc.citation.volume73-
dc.citation.startPage226-
dc.citation.endPage233-
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationCLINICAL BIOMECHANICS, Vol.73 : 226-233, 2020-03-
Appears in Collections:
1. College of Medicine (의과대학) > Dept. of Orthopedic Surgery (정형외과학교실) > 1. Journal Papers

qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.