Set screw fracture with cage dislocation after two-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF): a case report

The role of counter-torque holders in tightening of pedicle screw-rod constructs: a biomechanical study in a porcine model

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Pedicle screw-rod assembly procedures following pedicle screw insertion include contouring and placing rods into screw tulips, introducing set screws into the tulip along the screw thread, applying a counter-torque holder and tightening all the set screws clockwise. Even if an appropriate pedicle screw is implanted, screw dislodgement after tightening of the tulip and set screw is not uncommon. Pedicle wall violation resulting from excessive rotational force due to inadequate use of a counter-torque holder might be the reason. However, the strain change in the pedicle during tulip-set screw tightening and the role of counter-torque have never been investigated.

PURPOSE

This study determined differences in the strain change in the outer and inner pedicle walls during tulip-set screw tightening; additionally, the influence of counter-torque on pedicle wall violation was elucidated.

STUDY DESIGN

A controlled biomechanical study; the strain values of outer and inner pedicle walls in cadaveric porcine L4-L5 vertebrae during tulip-set screw tightening with or without a counter-torque holder were measured.

METHODS

Twelve L4-L5 fresh-frozen porcine lumbar vertebrae were implanted with screw-rod constructs; the set screw was randomly locked into the tulip in the right L5, right L4, left L5 and left L4 testing groups. The maximal values from eight strain gauges (P-R-O: outer cortex of right pedicle in proximal vertebra; P-R-I: inner cortex of right pedicle in proximal vertebra; D-R-O: outer cortex of right pedicle in distal vertebra; D-R-I: inner cortex of right pedicle in distal vertebra; P-L-O: outer cortex of left pedicle in proximal vertebra; P-L-I: inner cortex of left pedicle in proximal vertebra; D-L-O: outer cortex of left pedicle in distal vertebra; D-L-I: outer cortex of left pedicle in proximal vertebra) for each specimen during tightening to 12 Nm were measured.

RESULTS

The maximal strain values of the ipsilateral strain gauges in all testing groups were almost significantly higher when a counter-torque holder was not used than when one was used. The strain values in the adjacent pedicle of specimens without a counter-torque holder were significantly increased: P-R-O and P-R-I in the right L5 group; D-R-I in the right L4 group; P-L-I and P-L-O in the left L5 group; D-L-O and D-L-I in the left L4 group.

CONCLUSIONS

The constraint effect of counter-torque during tulip-set screw tightening is necessary. Clockwise rotational force with a fragile lateral pedicle wall suggests that caution is required when using a counter-torque holder to tighten the right L5 and left L4 constructs.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

A counter-torque holder is important during tulip-set screw tightening; improper use may lead to adjacent pedicle wall violation, sequentially resulting in pedicle screw loosening.

A biomechanical investigation of the retentive force of pedicle screw structures for different screw tulip designs

BACKGROUND

Pedicle screw based spinal fixation systems have been widely used for treating a variety of spinal diseases. The retentive force is an important factor that determines structural stability. The screw tulip design and the magnitude of nut tightening torque influence the retentive force. This study investigated the influences of varied tilt angles between the shaft-rod interface and varied nut tightening torques on the retentive force of the monoaxial, polyaxial, and uniplanar screws.

METHODS

Three types of tulip constructs were biomechanically tested. Two parameters that affect the retentive force include the tilt angle and the nut tightening torque. The retentive force was investigated by an axial gripping capacity test and axial torque gripping capacity test.

FINDING

Among all combinations of screw designs and tilt angles, the 12 Nm nut tightening torque offered a greater retentive force than the 8 Nm, except for monoaxial screws with a 0 degree tilt angle. For monoaxial screws, the retentive force was negatively correlated with increasing tilt angles. For polyaxial and uniplanar screws, the retentive forces remained constant with increasing tilt angles.

INTERPRETATION

In monoaxial screws, when the axis of the shaft isn't perpendicular to the axis of the rod, a gap is formed between the tulip-rod interface. This results in a decreased retentive force. In polyaxial and uniplanar screws, the contact surfaces were the same in different tilt angles, therefore, the retentive force remained constant, which was attributed to the adjustable tulips always being perpendicular to the axis of the rods.

Fracture of allograft interbody spacer resulting in post-operative radiculopathy: A case report

BACKGROUND

Allograft interbody spacers are utilized during transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) to reestablish anterior column support and disc height. While the TLIF technique offers many improvements over previous surgical methods, instrumentation and bone graft-related complications such as spacer misplacement or migration, screw fracture or misplacement, or rod breakage continue to be reported. The objective of this manuscript is to report on a fractured allograft interbody spacer that displaced into the neural foramen and resulted in impingement on the exiting nerve root that required revision.

CASE SUMMARY

A 50-year-old male had two-level TLIF with immediate post-operative right L5 radiculopathy. Computed tomography scan demonstrated a fractured allograft interbody spacer that displaced into the right neural foramen and impinged on the exiting L5 nerve root. Revision surgery was performed to remove the broken allograft fragments from the right L5 foramen and the intact portion of the spacer was left in place. The right leg L5 radicular pain resolved. At the last follow up 12 mo after the index procedure, computed tomography scan confirmed sound interbody and posterolateral fusion.

CONCLUSION

Displacement of broken allograft interbody spacer following TLIF procedures can result in neurological sequelae that require revision. To avoid such an occurrence, the authors recommend allowing sufficient time for the reconstitution of the graft in saline prior to use to decrease brittleness, to use an impactor size that is as close as possible to the spacer size and meticulous inspection of the cortical allograft spacer for any visible imperfection prior to insertion.