完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位語言
dc.contributor.authorChen, Shih-Haoen_US
dc.contributor.authorLin, Shang-Chihen_US
dc.contributor.authorTsai, Wen-Chien_US
dc.contributor.authorWang, Chih-Weien_US
dc.contributor.authorChao, Shih-Hengen_US
dc.date.accessioned2014-12-08T15:28:39Z-
dc.date.available2014-12-08T15:28:39Z-
dc.date.issued2012-05-16en_US
dc.identifier.issn1471-2474en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-13-72en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11536/20717-
dc.description.abstractBackground: Little is known about the biomechanical effectiveness of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) cages in different positioning and various posterior implants used after decompressive surgery. The use of the various implants will induce the kinematic and mechanical changes in range of motion (ROM) and stresses at the surgical and adjacent segments. Unilateral pedicle screw with or without supplementary facet screw fixation in the minimally invasive TLIF procedure has not been ascertained to provide adequate stability without the need to expose on the contralateral side. This study used finite element (FE) models to investigate biomechanical differences in ROM and stress on the neighboring structures after TLIF cages insertion in conjunction with posterior fixation. Methods: A validated finite-element (FE) model of L1-S1 was established to implant three types of cages (TLIF with a single moon-shaped cage in the anterior or middle portion of vertebral bodies, and TLIF with a left diagonally placed ogival-shaped cage) from the left L4-5 level after unilateral decompressive surgery. Further, the effects of unilateral versus bilateral pedicle screw fixation (UPSF vs. BPSF) in each TLIF cage model was compared to analyze parameters, including stresses and ROM on the neighboring annulus, cage-vertebral interface and pedicle screws. Results: All the TLIF cages positioned with BPSF showed similar ROM (<5%) at surgical and adjacent levels, except TLIF with an anterior cage in flexion (61% lower) and TLIF with a left diagonal cage in left lateral bending (33% lower) at surgical level. On the other hand, the TLIF cage models with left UPSF showed varying changes of ROM and annulus stress in extension, right lateral bending and right axial rotation at surgical level. In particular, the TLIF model with a diagonal cage, UPSF, and contralateral facet screw fixation stabilize segmental motion of the surgical level mostly in extension and contralaterally axial rotation. Prominent stress shielded to the contralateral annulus, cage-vertebral interface, and pedicle screw at surgical level. A supplementary facet screw fixation shared stresses around the neighboring tissues and revealed similar ROM and stress patterns to those models with BPSF. Conclusions: TLIF surgery is not favored for asymmetrical positioning of a diagonal cage and UPSF used in contralateral axial rotation or lateral bending. Supplementation of a contralateral facet screw is recommended for the TLIF construct.en_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.subjectTransforaminal lumbar interbody fusionen_US
dc.subjectPedicle screw fixationen_US
dc.subjectContralateral facet screwen_US
dc.subjectFinite element analysisen_US
dc.titleBiomechanical comparison of unilateral and bilateral pedicle screws fixation for transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion after decompressive surgery - a finite element analysisen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/1471-2474-13-72en_US
dc.identifier.journalBMC MUSCULOSKELETAL DISORDERSen_US
dc.citation.volume13en_US
dc.citation.issueen_US
dc.citation.epageen_US
dc.contributor.department機械工程學系zh_TW
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Mechanical Engineeringen_US
dc.identifier.wosnumberWOS:000311345300001-
dc.citation.woscount11-
顯示於類別:期刊論文


文件中的檔案:

  1. 000311345300001.pdf

若為 zip 檔案,請下載檔案解壓縮後,用瀏覽器開啟資料夾中的 index.html 瀏覽全文。