Clinical biomechanics (Bristol, Avon) · 2009
The biomechanical effects of osteoporosis vertebral augmentation with cancellous bone granules or bone cement on treated and adjacent non-treated vertebral bodies: a finite element evaluation.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Zhang Licheng, Yang Guojing, Wu Lijun, Yu Binfeng
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: In order to reduce the complications of bone cement, many efforts are underway to replace bone cement augmentation with cancellous bone granule augmentation for treating compression fractures of osteoporotic vertebral bodies. The goal of this study was to investigate the biomechanical effects of cancellous bone granule augmentation of Optimesh and polymethylmethacrylate augmentation of kyphoplasty on treated and adjacent non-treated vertebral bodies.
METHODS: Three-dimensional, anatomically detailed finite element models of the L1-L2 functional spinal unit were developed on the basis of cadaver computed tomography scans. The material properties and plug forms of the L2 centrum were adapted to simulate osteoporosis, cancellous bone granule and polymethylmethacrylate augmentation. The models assumed a three-column loading configuration as the following types: compression, flexion and extension.
FINDINGS: Compared with the osteoporotic model, changes in stress and strain at adjacent levels both of cancellous bone granule and polymethylmethacrylate augmentation models were minimal, but stresses/strains within the two reinforcement material plugs were modified distinctly and differently. In addition, osteoporosis and augmentation had little effect on either the axial compressive displacement of the three columns or the average disc internal pressure in all models.
INTERPRETATION: Both cancellous bone granule and polymethylmethacrylate augmentation restore the total strength and stiffness level of treated vertebral bodies and benefit the reconstruction of vertebral function. Regarding the material mechanical compatibility and the biocompatibility of the treated vertebral body and reinforcement material, however, the morcelized cancellous bone is better than polymethylmethacrylate augmentation.
METHODS: Three-dimensional, anatomically detailed finite element models of the L1-L2 functional spinal unit were developed on the basis of cadaver computed tomography scans. The material properties and plug forms of the L2 centrum were adapted to simulate osteoporosis, cancellous bone granule and polymethylmethacrylate augmentation. The models assumed a three-column loading configuration as the following types: compression, flexion and extension.
FINDINGS: Compared with the osteoporotic model, changes in stress and strain at adjacent levels both of cancellous bone granule and polymethylmethacrylate augmentation models were minimal, but stresses/strains within the two reinforcement material plugs were modified distinctly and differently. In addition, osteoporosis and augmentation had little effect on either the axial compressive displacement of the three columns or the average disc internal pressure in all models.
INTERPRETATION: Both cancellous bone granule and polymethylmethacrylate augmentation restore the total strength and stiffness level of treated vertebral bodies and benefit the reconstruction of vertebral function. Regarding the material mechanical compatibility and the biocompatibility of the treated vertebral body and reinforcement material, however, the morcelized cancellous bone is better than polymethylmethacrylate augmentation.