Biomechanical Effects of a Cross Connector in Sacral Fractures – A Finite Element Analysis

2021 | journal article; research paper. A publication with affiliation to the University of Göttingen.

Jump to: Cite & Linked | Documents & Media | Details | Version history

Cite this publication

​Biomechanical Effects of a Cross Connector in Sacral Fractures – A Finite Element Analysis​
Gierig, M.; Liu, F.; Weiser, L.; Lehmann, W.; Wriggers, P.; Marino, M. & Saul, D.​ (2021) 
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology9.​ DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2021.669321 

Documents & Media

fbioe-09-669321-g001.tif872.93 kBUnknownfbioe-09-669321-g002.tif580.4 kBUnknownfbioe-09-669321-g003.tif372.18 kBUnknownfbioe-09-669321-g004.tif414.88 kBUnknownfbioe-09-669321-g005.tif317.21 kBUnknownfbioe-09-669321-g006.tif444.5 kBUnknownfbioe-09-669321-g007.tif248.5 kBUnknownfbioe-09-669321-g008.tif168.47 kBUnknownfbioe-09-669321.pdf4.32 MBUnknownImage_1.JPEG2.66 MBUnknownImage_2.JPEG527.79 kBUnknownImage_3.JPEG1.09 MBUnknownImage_4.JPEG1.47 MBUnknownImage_5.JPEG1.71 MBUnknown

License

Published Version

Attribution 4.0 CC BY 4.0

Details

Authors
Gierig, Meike; Liu, Fangrui; Weiser, Lukas; Lehmann, Wolfgang; Wriggers, Peter; Marino, Michele; Saul, Dominik
Abstract
Background: Spinopelvic fractures and approaches of operative stabilization have been a source of controversial discussion. Biomechanical data support the benefit of a spinopelvic stabilization and minimally invasive procedures help to reduce the dissatisfying complication rate. The role of a cross connector within spinopelvic devices remains inconclusive. We aimed to analyze the effect of a cross connector in a finite element model (FE model). Study Design: A FE model of the L1-L5 spine segment with pelvis and a spinopelvic stabilization was reconstructed from patient-specific CT images. The biomechanical relevance of a cross connector in a Denis zone I (AO: 61-B2) sacrum fracture was assessed in the FE model by applying bending and twisting forces with and without a cross connector. Biomechanical outcomes from the numerical model were investigated also considering uncertainties in material properties and levels of osseointegration. Results: The designed FE model showed comparable values in range-of-motion (ROM) and stresses with reference to the literature. The superiority of the spinopelvic stabilization (L5/Os ilium) ± cross connector compared to a non-operative procedure was confirmed in all analyzed loading conditions by reduced ROM and principal stresses in the disk L5/S1, vertebral body L5 and the fracture area. By considering the combination of all loading cases, the presence of a cross connector reduced the maximum stresses in the fracture area of around 10%. This difference has been statistically validated ( p < 0.0001). Conclusion: The implementation of a spinopelvic stabilization (L5/Os ilium) in sacrum fractures sustained the fracture and led to enhanced biomechanical properties compared to a non-reductive procedure. While the additional cross connector did not alter the resulting ROM in L4/L5 or L5/sacrum, the reduction of the maximum stresses in the fracture area was significant.
Background: Spinopelvic fractures and approaches of operative stabilization have been a source of controversial discussion. Biomechanical data support the benefit of a spinopelvic stabilization and minimally invasive procedures help to reduce the dissatisfying complication rate. The role of a cross connector within spinopelvic devices remains inconclusive. We aimed to analyze the effect of a cross connector in a finite element model (FE model). Study Design: A FE model of the L1-L5 spine segment with pelvis and a spinopelvic stabilization was reconstructed from patient-specific CT images. The biomechanical relevance of a cross connector in a Denis zone I (AO: 61-B2) sacrum fracture was assessed in the FE model by applying bending and twisting forces with and without a cross connector. Biomechanical outcomes from the numerical model were investigated also considering uncertainties in material properties and levels of osseointegration. Results: The designed FE model showed comparable values in range-of-motion (ROM) and stresses with reference to the literature. The superiority of the spinopelvic stabilization (L5/Os ilium) ± cross connector compared to a non-operative procedure was confirmed in all analyzed loading conditions by reduced ROM and principal stresses in the disk L5/S1, vertebral body L5 and the fracture area. By considering the combination of all loading cases, the presence of a cross connector reduced the maximum stresses in the fracture area of around 10%. This difference has been statistically validated ( p < 0.0001). Conclusion: The implementation of a spinopelvic stabilization (L5/Os ilium) in sacrum fractures sustained the fracture and led to enhanced biomechanical properties compared to a non-reductive procedure. While the additional cross connector did not alter the resulting ROM in L4/L5 or L5/sacrum, the reduction of the maximum stresses in the fracture area was significant.
Issue Date
2021
Journal
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology 
Organization
Klinik für Unfallchirurgie, Orthopädie und Plastische Chirurgie 
eISSN
2296-4185
Language
English
Sponsor
Open-Access-Publikationsfonds 2021

Reference

Citations


Social Media