Insertion torque is not a good predictor of pedicle screw loosening after spinal instrumentation: a prospective study in 8 patients.
BACKGROUND
Pedicle screw loosening is a major safety concern in instrumented spinal surgery due to loosening with potential pseudarthrosis and possible loss of correction requiring revision surgery. Several cadaver studies have compared insertion torque of pedicle screws with resistance to pullout or cyclic loading. In most of these studies, a correlation has been found between these variables. Clinical studies have been made, comparing insertion torque to bone mineral density or radiological signs of screw loosening. There are no clinical studies comparing insertion torque to extraction torque or other biomechanical parameters in vivo. This study was designed to investigate whether the insertion torque of pedicle screws can be used to predict the purchase of the screws.


METHODS
The insertion torque of stainless steel pedicle screws was recorded in eight patients undergoing lumbar fusion surgery with four-screw constructs. Torque gauge manometers were used for the recordings. The implants were removed after one year, and the extraction torque of the screws was recorded.


RESULTS
The mean insertion torque was 76 ± 41 Ncm and the mean extraction torque 29 ± 36 Ncm. The r value was 0.591, suggesting that there was a correlation between the insertion and extraction torque. However, the scattergram revealed that the screws could be divided into two groups, six screws with a high correlation between insertion and extraction torque, and 26 screws where no correlation could be demonstrated.


CONCLUSIONS
In this unique human in-vivo study, the insertion torque could not be used to predict the purchase of lumbar pedicle screws one year after implantation. It could be demonstrated that in vivo insertion torque alone is of minor value to estimate pullout strength, and should be combined with or replaced by more accurate measures.
Sandén
Bengt
B
Uppsala University Hospital, Institute for Surgical Sciences, Department of Orthopedics, SE-751 85 Uppsala, Sweden. yohan.robinson@surgsci.uu.se.
Olerud
Claes
C
Larsson
Sune
S
Robinson
Yohan
Y
J Orthop Sci. 2005;10(2):133-6
15815859
J Orthop Res. 2000 Sep;18(5):808-14
11117304
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1993 Nov;18(15):2240-5
8278839
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1986 Feb;(203):75-98
3956000
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2004 Apr;86(3):457-61
15125138
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1997 Mar;79(2):183-9
9119839
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1993 Dec;(297):111-6
8242917
J Spinal Disord. 1994 Apr;7(2):139-45
8003831
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1996 Nov 1;21(21):2429-34
8923627
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1993 Sep 15;18(12):1673-6
8235848
J Orthop Sci. 2005;10(2):137-44
15815860
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000 Apr 1;25(7):858-64
10751298
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1994 Dec 15;19(24):2774-9
7899978
J Orthop Trauma. 1990;4(2):169-74
2358933
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1988 Sep;13(9):1075-6
3206303
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1996 Sep 1;21(17):1962-8
8883195
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2002 Apr;84(3):387-91
12002498
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1991 Nov;16(11):1335-41
1750009
Eur Spine J. 2000 Dec;9(6):534-7
11189923
Spine J. 2004 Sep-Oct;4(5):513-8
15363421
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1998 Jun 1;23(11):1220-7; discussion 1228
9636975
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1993 Nov;18(15):2231-8; discussion 2238-9
8278838