Total disc replacement positioning affects facet contact forces and vertebral body strains.
METHODS
A validated nonlinear three-dimensional finite element (FE) model of a single lumbar motion segment (L3-L4) was used to evaluate the effects of total disc replacement (TDR). The model was implanted with a fixed-bearing TDR (ProDisc-L) at 2 surgically relevant positions and exercised about the 3 anatomic axes. Facet forces, range of motion (RoM), and vertebral body strains were evaluated.


OBJECTIVE
The objective of the current study was to evaluate how TDR implantation and positioning affects facet joint forces and vertebral body strains. We hypothesized that facet contact forces (FCFs) would increase with TDR to compensate for the loss of periprosthetic load-bearing structures, and that vertebral body strains would increase in the region around the metallic footplates.


BACKGROUND
TDR has the potential to replace fusion as the gold standard for the treatment of painful degenerative disc disease. However, complications after TDR include index level facet arthrosis and implant subsidence. Alterations in facet and vertebral body loading after TDR and their dependence on implant positioning are not fully understood.


METHODS
An FEM of L3-L4 was created and validated using RoM, disc pressure, and bony strains from previously published data. A TDR was incorporated into the L3-L4 spine model. All models were subjected to a compressive follower load of 500 N and moments of 7.5 Nm about the 3 anatomic axes.


RESULTS
Overall RoM and FCFs tended to increase with TDR. FCFs increased by an order of magnitude during flexion. Posterior placement of the device resulted in an unloading of the facets during extension. Areas of strain maxima were observed in the anterior portion of the vertebral body during flexion after TDR. The area of initial bone resorption signal under the metal footplate was greater when the device was anteriorly placed.


CONCLUSIONS
The current study predicted a decrease in segmental rotational stiffness resulting from TDR. This resulted from the removal of load bearing soft tissue structures, and caused increased loading in the facets. Additionally, vertebral body strains were generally higher after TDR, and tended to increase with decreased rotational stiffness. Posterior placement of the device provided a more physiologic load transfer to the vertebral body.
Rundell
Steven A
SA
Exponent Inc, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. srundell@exponent.com
Auerbach
Joshua D
JD
Balderston
Richard A
RA
Kurtz
Steven M
SM
D000368:Aged; D001696:Biomechanical Phenomena; D001862:Bone Resorption; D002102:Cadaver; D019245:Compressive Strength / Q000502:physiology; D020342:Finite Element Analysis; D006801:Humans; D007403:Intervertebral Disc / Q000601:surgery*; D008159:Lumbar Vertebrae / Q000502:physiology / Q000601:surgery; D008297:Male; D008954:Models, Biological; D019736:Prostheses and Implants; D016059:Range of Motion, Articular / Q000502:physiology; D012399:Rotation; D019415:Torque; D016474:Weight-Bearing / Q000502:physiology; D021801:Zygapophyseal Joint / Q000502:physiology*