Biomechanical evaluation of a new AxiaLIF technique for two-level lumbar fusion.
Single level axial lumbar interbody fusion (AxiaLIF) using a transsacral rod through a paracoccygeal approach has been developed with promising early clinical results and biomechanical stability. Recently, the transsacral rod has been extended to perform a two-level fusion at both L4-L5 and L5-S1 levels (AxiaLIF II). No biomechanical studies have been conducted on multilevel fusion using the AxiaLIF technique. In this study, the biomechanics of L4-S1 motion segments instrumented with the AxiaLIF II transsacral rod was evaluated. Six human cadaveric lumbosacral spine segments from L4 to S1 were used (age ranges 46-74 years). Unconstrained and non-destructive pure moments in axial torsion, lateral bending, and flexion extension were applied to each specimen following intact, standalone AxiaLIF II, and AxiaLIF II with two posterior fixation options: facet screws and pedicle screws with rods. Range of motion was calculated from the raw data collected with an optical motion tracking system. The two-level transsacral rod was successfully inserted in all the specimens. At L4-L5 level in axial torsion (AT) and flexion extension (FE), none of the surgical treatments showed statistically significant difference between the procedures (all P > 0.05) although facet screws and pedicle screws had higher stability on average. In lateral bending (LB), the two posterior fixation techniques had significantly higher construct stability (P < 0.05) than the standalone rod. No significant difference was found between facet screws and pedicle screws (P = 0.821). At L5-S1 level in AT and LB, none of the surgical treatments were found to be statistically significant (all P > 0.05). In FE, standalone two-level transsacral rod had significantly higher range of motion (ROM) compared with the posterior fixation techniques (P < 0.05). In conclusion, the standalone rod reduced intact ROM significantly. Supplementary fixations including facet screws and pedicle screws are required to achieve higher construct stability for successful fusion. Further clinical studies are essential to evaluate the practical success of this technique.
Erkan
Serkan
S
Twin Cities Spine Center, 913 East 26th Street, Suite 600, Minneapolis, MN 55404, USA.
Wu
Chunhui
C
Mehbod
Amir A
AA
Hsu
Brian
B
Pahl
Douglas W
DW
Transfeldt
Ensor E
EE
D000368:Aged; D001696:Biomechanical Phenomena / Q000502:physiology; D001863:Bone Screws / Q000592:standards / Q000639:trends; D002102:Cadaver; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007091:Image Processing, Computer-Assisted / Q000379:methods; D016268:Internal Fixators / Q000592:standards / Q000639:trends*; D008159:Lumbar Vertebrae / Q000033:anatomy & histology / Q000502:physiology* / Q000601:surgery*; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D055095:Optics and Photonics / Q000379:methods; D016059:Range of Motion, Articular / Q000502:physiology*; D012447:Sacrum / Q000033:anatomy & histology / Q000502:physiology / Q000601:surgery; D013122:Spinal Diseases / Q000601:surgery; D013123:Spinal Fusion / Q000295:instrumentation* / Q000379:methods*; D013314:Stress, Mechanical; D014741:Video Recording / Q000379:methods; D016474:Weight-Bearing / Q000502:physiology; D021801:Zygapophyseal Joint / Q000033:anatomy & histology / Q000502:physiology / Q000601:surgery