Mechanical performance of thoracolumbosacral pedicle screw systems: An analysis of data submitted to the Food and Drug Administration

Impact of Rod Placement and Tulip Design on Screw-Rod Gripping Capacity in Spinopelvic Fixation: Evaluation Across a Spectrum of Recessed to Extended Lengths

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

High rates of pelvic instrumentation failure (4.5-38%) have been reported, often attributed to issues within the screw-tulip-rod connection. While previous research has explored various aspects of this connection, the influence of tulip design and relative rod placement on mechanical failure remains unclear.

PURPOSE

This study aims to investigate how screw-tulip design and variations in rod placement relative to the tulip affect the integrity of the screw-tulip-rod connection, utilizing axial and torsional gripping capacity tests to evaluate mechanical stability.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Biomechanical METHODS: Mechanical testing was conducted following ASTM F1798-21 to assess the interconnection mechanisms in pelvic fixation constructs. Using 5.5mm Cobalt Chromium rods with porous fusion/fixation (PFFS) screws, axial gripping capacity (AGC) tests measured the axial load before translatory slippage of the rod, while torsional gripping capacity (TGC) tests assessed the torque required to induce rotational slippage. Variations in rod placement at the tulip head were tested in recessed (-2mm, -1mm), flush (0mm), and extended positions (+1mm, +10mm), simulating failure during flexion, extension, and rotation for both open and closed tulip-head designs. ANOVA was used to evaluate the effects of rod placement on connection failure, with significance set at p<0.05.

RESULTS

AGC and TGC tests revealed significant reductions for recessed rod placements, indicating suboptimal placement. At -1mm and -2mm, AGC for simulated flexion decreased by 28.8% (p<0.010) and 45.6% (p<0.001) for the open-head design and 30.5% (p<0.018) and 57.5% (p<0.001) for the closed-head design, respectively, compared to the non-recessed rod placement. TGC also showed a significant decline at -2mm, with a 25.4% reduction compared to the +1mm extended length (p<0.001) and a 20.3% reduction compared to the -1mm recessed length (p=0.005), irrespective of head design. The open and closed-head designs exhibited similar trends; however, the closed-head design was shown to better resist structural failure at recessed lengths. At -2mm simulating extension, the closed-head design was 54.8% greater than the open-head design for AGC (p<.001) and 28.3% greater for TGC.

CONCLUSION

Our findings underscore that both flush (0mm) and extended (+1, +10mm) rod placements relative to the screw-tulip offer sufficient gripping capacity whereas recessed placements (-1, -2mm) have substantial reductions. The closed-head design was shown to better resist structural failure at recessed placements.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Rod placement relative to the most distal pelvic screw during spinopelvic fixation varries in surgical practice - whether flush to, extended past, or recessed into the screw-head. Biomechanical evaluating of the axial and torsion gripping capacities at these positions provies a foundation for clinical decision-making.

Nondestructive acoustic modal analysis for assessing bone screw stability: An ex vivo animal study

Conventional insertion torque and pull-out tests are destructive and unsuitable for clinical bone screw fixation. This study evaluates screw stability using acoustic modal analysis (AMA) and Periotest compared to traditional methods in an ex vivo animal model. Titanium self-tapping screws (STS) and nonself-tapping screws (N-STS) were implanted in the proximal tibia of 12 rabbits. Four testing methods were used to assess screw stability: peak insertion torque (PIT) during implantation, AMA for natural frequency (NF), Periotest for Periotest value (PTV), and pull-out test for peak pullout force (PPF). Euthanization was performed at 0 (primary stability), 4, and 8 weeks (secondary stability). No significant difference in primary stability was found between STS and N-STS except for AMA (STS: NF 2434 ± 67 Hz, N-STS: NF 2572 ± 43 Hz; p = 0.62). Secondary stability increased significantly over time for both screw types (4-week: NF 3687 ± 36 vs. 3408 ± 45 Hz, PTV 1.4 ± 1.6 vs. -1.5 ± 1.8, PPF 236 ± 29 vs. 220 ± 34 N; 8-week: NF 3890 ± 39 vs. 3613 ± 31 Hz, PTV -3.2 ± 2.5 vs. -2 ± 4.3, PPF 248 ± 25 vs. 289 ± 28 N). Higher NF values for given PTV/PPF indicate potential clinical advantages. Significant differences between primary and secondary stabilities suggest osteointegration was mainly achieved in the 4-week group.

Biomechanical effects of posterior lumbar interbody fusion with vertical placement of pedicle screws compared to traditional placement

BACKGROUND

The pedicle screw technique is widely employed for vertebral body fixation in the treatment of spinal disorders. However, traditional screw placement methods require the dissection of paraspinal muscles and the insertion of pedicle screws at specific transverse section angles (TSA). Larger TSA angles require more force to pull the muscle tissue, which can increase the risk of surgical trauma and ischemic injury to the lumbar muscles.

AIM

To study the feasibility of zero-degree TSA vertical pedicle screw technique in the lumbosacral segment.

METHODS

Finite element models of vertebral bodies and pedicle screw-rod systems were established for the L4-S1 spinal segments. A standard axial load of 500 N and a rotational torque of 10 N/m were applied. Simulated screw pull-out experiment was conducted to observe pedicle screw resistance to pull-out, maximum stress, load-displacement ratio, maximum stress in vertebral bodies, load-displacement ratio in vertebral bodies, and the stress distribution in pedicle screws and vertebral bodies. Differences between the 0-degree and 17-degree TSA were compared.

RESULTS

At 0-degree TSA, the screw pull-out force decreased by 11.35% compared to that at 17-degree TSA (P < 0.05). At 0-degree and 17-degree TSA, the stress range in the screw-rod system was 335.1-657.5 MPa and 242.8-648.5 MPa, separately, which were below the fracture threshold for the screw-rod system (924 MPa). At 0-degree and 17-degree TSA, the stress range in the vertebral bodies was 68.45-78.91 MPa and 39.08-72.73 MPa, separately, which were below the typical bone yield stress range for vertebral bodies (110-125 MPa). At 0-degree TSA, the load-displacement ratio for the vertebral bodies and pedicle screws was slightly lower compared to that at 17-degree TSA, indicating slightly lower stability (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The safety and stability of 0-degree TSA are slightly lower, but the risks of screw-rod system fracture, vertebral body fracture, and rupture are within acceptable limits.

Design and 3D printing of novel titanium spine rods with lower flexural modulus and stiffness profile with optimised imaging compatibility

PURPOSE

To manufacture and test 3D printed novel design titanium spine rods with lower flexural modulus and stiffness compared to standard solid titanium rods for use in metastatic spine tumour surgery (MSTS) and osteoporosis.

METHODS

Novel design titanium spine rods were designed and 3D printed. Three-point bending test was performed to assess mechanical performance of rods, while a French bender was used to assess intraoperative rod contourability. Furthermore, 3D printed spine rods were tested for CT & MR imaging compatibility using phantom setup.

RESULTS

Different spine rod designs generated includes shell, voronoi, gyroid, diamond, weaire-phelan, kelvin, and star. Tests showed 3D printed rods had lower flexural modulus with reduction ranging from 2 to 25% versus standard rod. Shell rods exhibited highest reduction in flexural modulus of 25% (~ 77.4 GPa) and star rod exhibited lowest reduction in flexural modulus of 2% (100.8GPa). 3D printed rod showed reduction in stiffness ranging from 40 to 59%. Shell rod displayed highest reduction in stiffness of 59% (179.9 N/mm) and gyroid had least reduction in stiffness of 40% (~ 259.2 N/mm). Rod bending test showed that except gyroid, other rod designs demonstrated lesser bending difficulty versus standard rod. All 3D printed rods demonstrated improved CT/MR imaging compatibility with reduced artefacts versus standard rod.

CONCLUSION

By utilising novel design approach, we successfully generated a spine rod design portfolio with lower flexural modulus/stiffness profile and better CT/MR imaging compatibility for potential use in MSTS/other conditions such as osteoporosis. Thus, exploration of new rod designs in surgical application could enhance treatment outcome and improve quality of life for patients.

Pullout Strength of Pedicle Screws Inserted Using Three Different Techniques: A Biomechanical Study on Polyurethane Foam Block

Pullout strength is an important indicator of the performance and longevity of pedicle screws and can be heavily influenced by the screw design, the insertion technique and the quality of surrounding bone. The purpose of this study was to investigate the pullout strength of three different pedicle screws inserted using three different strategies and with two different loading conditions. Three pedicle screws with different thread designs (single-lead-thread (SLT) screw, dual-lead-thread (DLT) screw and mixed-single-lead-thread (MSLT) screw) were inserted into a pre-drilled rigid polyurethane foam block using three strategies: (A) screw inserted to a depth of 33.5 mm; (B) screw inserted to a depth of 33.5 mm and then reversed by 3.5 mm to simulate an adjustment of the tulip height of the pedicle screw and (C) screw inserted to a depth of 30 mm. After insertion, each screw type was set up with and without a cyclic load being applied to the screw head prior to the pullout test. To ensure that the normality assumption is met, we applied the Shapiro-Wilk test to all datasets before conducting the non-parametric statistical test (Kruskal-Wallis test combined with pairwise Mann-Whitney-U tests). All screw types inserted using strategy A had a significantly greater pullout strength than those inserted using strategies B and C, regardless of if the screw was pre-loaded with a cyclic load prior to testing. Without the use of the cyclic pre-load, the MSLT screw had a greater pullout strength than the SLT and DLT screws for all three insertion strategies. However, the fixation strength of all screws was reduced when pre-loaded before testing, with the MSLT screw inserted using strategy B producing a significantly lower pullout strength than all other groups (p < 0.05). In contrast, the MSLT screw using insertion strategies A and C had a greater pullout strength than the SLT and DLT screws both with and without pre-loading. In conclusion, the MSLT pedicle screw exhibited the greatest pullout strength of the screws tested under all insertion strategies and loading conditions, except for insertion strategy B with a cyclic pre-load. While all screw types showed a reduced pullout strength when using insertion strategy B (screw-out depth adjustment), the MSLT screw had the largest reduction in pullout strength when using a pre-load before testing. Based on these findings, during the initial screw insertion, it is recommended to not fully insert the screw thread into the bone and to leave a retention length for depth adjustment to avoid the need for screw-out adjustment, as with insertion strategy B.

Novel uniplanar pedicle screw systems applied to thoracolumbar fractures: a biomechanical study

Objective: In this study, the advantages of the internal fixation configuration composed of uniplanar pedicle screws in the treatment of thoracolumbar fractures were verified by biomechanical experimental methods, which provided the basis for subsequent clinical experiments and clinical applications. Methods: A total of 24 fresh cadaveric spine specimens (T12-L2) were utilized to conduct biomechanical experiments. Two different internal fixation configurations, namely, the 6-screw configuration and the 4-screw/2-NIS (new intermediate screws) configuration, were tested using fixed-axis pedicle screws (FAPS), uniplanar pedicle screws (UPPS), and polyaxial pedicle screws (PAPS) respectively. The spine specimens were uniformly loaded with 8NM pure force couples in the directions of anteflexion, extension, left bending, right bending, left rotation, and right rotation, and the range of motion (ROM) of the T12-L1 and L1-L2 segments of the spine was measured and recorded to access biomechanical stability. Results: No structural damage such as ligament rupture or fracture occurred during all experimental tests. In the 6-screw configuration, the ROM of the specimens in the UPPS group was significantly better than that of the PAPS group but weaker than those of the FAPS group (p < 0.01). In the 4-screw/2-NIS configuration, the results were identical to the biomechanical test results for the 6-screw configuration (p < 0.01). Conclusion: Biomechanical test results show that the internal fixation configuration with UPPS can maintain the stability of the spine well, and the results are better than that of PAPS. UPPS has both the biomechanical advantages of FAPS and the superiority of easy operation of PAPS. We believe it is an optional internal fixation device for minimally invasive treatment of thoracolumbar fractures.

Biomechanical comparison of different rod-to-rod connectors to a conventional titanium- and cobalt chromium posterior spinal fixation system

Introduction

Several types of rod-to-rod connectors are available for the extension of spinal fixation systems. However, scientific literature regarding the mechanical performance of different rod-to-rod connector systems is lacking.

Research question

The goal of this study was to evaluate the mechanical characteristics of axial and lateral rod connectors in comparison to a conventional pedicle screw rod (titanium and cobalt chromium) construct.

Material and method

Six types of instrumentations were investigated in a standardized test model to quantify the mechanical differences: 1: titanium rod; 2: titanium rod with axial connector; 3: titanium rod with lateral connector; 4: cobalt chromium rod; 5: cobalt chromium rod with axial connector; 6: cobalt chromium rod with lateral connector. All groups were tested in static compression, static torsion and dynamic compression and statistically compared regarding failure load and stiffness.

Results

In static compression loading, the use of connectors increased the construct stiffness, but unaffected the yield load. The use of a cobalt chromium rod significantly increased by approximately 40% the yield load and stiffness in comparison to the titanium rod configurations. Under dynamic compression, a similar or higher fatigue strength for all tested groups in comparison to the titanium rod configuration was evaluated, with the exception of titanium rod with axial connector.

Conclusion

Biomechanically, using rod connectors is a secure way for the extension of a construct and is mechanically equal to a conventional screw rod construct. However, in clinical use, attention should be paid regarding placement of the connectors at high loaded areas.

Global stiffness and residual stresses in spinal fixator systems: A validated finite element study on the interconnection mechanism

Posterior spinal fixation systems are the gold standard to treat different column disorders using rods and screws. The proper connection between them is guaranteed by the Interconnection Mechanism (IM), consisting of different metallic subcomponents held together through the application of tightening torque. The response of the fixation system is defined by its overall stiffness, which in turn is governed by the local residual stress field arising during tightening. Although literature computational models for studying spinal fixation are becoming increasingly anatomically complex, most studies disregard completely the realistic modeling of the IM, namely choosing elastic-plastic material models and proper contact interactions. In this frame, the present study aims at increasing awareness in the field of spinal fixation modeling by investigating the mechanical response of the IM in terms of overall stiffness and local residual stresses. Once validated through dedicated experiments, the results of the proposed model have been compared with the current literature, highlighting the key role of the IM in the reliable modeling of spinal fixation.

Summary of the FDA virtual public workshop on spinal device clinical review held on September 17, 2021

The mission of Food and Drug Administration (FDA)'s Center for Devices and Radiological Health is to protect and promote public health. It assures that patients and providers have timely and continued access to safe, effective, and high-quality medical devices and safe radiation-emitting products by providing meaningful and timely information about the products we regulate and the decisions we make. On September 17, 2021, an FDA workshop was held to provide information to stakeholders, including members of the spine community, device manufacturers, regulatory affairs professionals, clinicians, patients, and the general public regarding FDA regulations, guidance and regulatory pathways related to spinal device clinical review. It was not intended to communicate any new policies, processes, or interpretations regarding medical device marketing authorizations. This workshop consisted of individual presentations, group discussions, question and answer sessions, and audience surveys. Information-sharing included discussions related to patient-reported outcomes, clinician-reported outcomes, observer-reported outcomes, and performance outcomes. Discussions involving external subject matter experts covered topics related to spinal device clinical studies including definition of a target population, enrollment criteria, strategies for inclusion of under-represented patient groups, reporting of adverse event and secondary surgical procedures, clinical study endpoints, and clinical outcome assessments. A meeting transcript and webcast workshop link are currently posted on the FDA website. Important related issues and challenges were discussed, and an exciting range of new ideas and concepts were shared which hold promise to advance regulatory science, patient care and future innovation related to spinal devices.