Pedicle screw pullout strength. Correlation with insertional torque.

A biomechanical study of human cadaveric sacra using insertional torque and bone mineral density was conducted to determine the optimal sagittal trajectory of S1 pedicle screws. To measure the maximal insertional torque of sacral promontory versus bicortical pedicle screw fixation. Fixation of instrumentation to the sacrum is commonly accomplished using S1 pedicle screws, with previous studies reporting biomechanical advantages of bicortical over unicortical S1 screws. The biomechanical effect of bicortical screws (paralleling the endplate) versus screws directed into the apex of the sacral promontory is unknown. For this study, 10 fresh frozen cadaver sacra were harvested and evaluated with dual-energy radiograph absorptiometry to assess bone mineral density. Matched 7.5-mm monoaxial stainless steel pedicle screws then were randomly assigned by side (left versus right) and placed bicortically or into the apex of the sacral promontory under direct visualization. Maximum insertional torque was recorded for each screw revolution with a digital torque wrench (TQJE1500, Snap-On Tools, Kenosha, WI). Maximum bicortical S1 screw insertional torque averaged 5.22 +/- 0.83 inch-pounds, as compared with the maximum sacral promontory S1 screw insertional torque of 10.34 +/- 1.94 inch-pounds. This resulted in a 99% increase in maximum insertional torque (P = 0.005) using the "tricortical" technique, with the screw directed into the sacral promontory. Mean bone mineral density was 940 +/- 0.25 mg/cm2 (range, 507-1428 mg/cm2). The bone mineral density correlated with maximal insertional torque for the sacral promontory technique (r = 0.806; P = 0.005), but not for the bicortical technique (r = 0.48; P = 0.16). The screws directed into the apex of the sacral promontory of the S1 pedicle resulted in an average 99% increase in peak insertional torque (P = 0.005), as compared with bicortical S1 pedicle screw fixation. Tricortical pedicle screw fixation correlates directly with bone mineral density.

ObjectivesInstrumentation failure remains a significant complication in spinal surgery. Preoperative bone health assessment is critical prior to spinal fusion surgery. Currently, bone mineral density (BMD) and Hounsfield Unit (HU) are common preoperative assessments, although it remains unclear which is more predictive of screw fixation strength. We aimed to identify the most reliable preoperative evaluation method for predicting screw insertional torque in patients undergoing lumbar fusion surgery.MethodsPatients who underwent lumbar fusion surgery utilizing pedicle screws between 2021 and 2023, were prospectively registered in our database. All participants underwent preoperative lumbar CT and Dual-Energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DEXA) scans. We analyzed data from 109 patients who underwent lumbar fusion surgery with 6.5mm pedicle screws. Preoperative BMD was measured via DEXA (lumbar spine and femur), and HU values were obtained from preoperative lumbar CT scans. Insertional torque of the screws was measured intraoperatively using a calibrated torque wrench. Correlations between insertional torque and BMD/HU as well as patients' demographic/lab data were analyzed.ResultsA total of 335 pedicle screws were analyzed. Femoral BMD exhibited the strongest correlation with insertional torque (r = 0.557, P < 0.001), compared with lumbar BMD and HU. Age, ASA grade, BMI, serum calcium, and albumin showed weak correlations.ConclusionsFemoral BMD demonstrated the strongest, although still moderate, association with intraoperative insertional torque among all preoperative bone quality measures evaluated, suggesting that it may offer a more informative estimate of underlying bone strength in patients undergoing lumbar fusion.

The risks of pedicle wall breech with larger screws after undertapping

In reconstruction of the osteoporotic spine, patients often show poor outcome because of pedicle screw failure. This study used osteoporotic and nonosteoporotic vertebrae to determine the difference in fixation strength between pedicle screws inserted straight forward and pedicle screws inserted in an upward trajectory toward the superior end plate (i.e., end-plate screws). There is some evidence to suggest that end-plate screws have a strength advantage. The particular focus was on osteoporotic vertebrae. Thirty-three vertebrae (T10-L2) were harvested. The bone mineral density (BMD) was measured: 15 vertebrae were greater than 0.8 g/cm(2) and designated as nonosteoporotic (average BMD 1.146 ± 0.186 g/cm(2)) and 18 vertebrae were designated as osteoporotic (average BMD 0.643 ± 0.088 g/cm(2)). On one pedicle the screw was inserted straight forward and on the other pedicle the screw was inserted as an end-plate screw. The torque of insertion was measured (Proto 6106 torque screwdriver). Using an MTS Mini Bionix, two types of mechanical testing were carried out on each pedicle: (a) cephalocaudad toggling was first carried out to simulate some physiological type loading: 500 cycles at 0.3 Hz, at ±50 N; and (b) then each pedicle screw was pulled out at a displacement rate of 12.5 cm/min.There was no difference in pullout force between the pedicle screws inserted straight forward and the pedicle screws inserted as end-plate screws. This result applies whether the vertebrae were osteoporotic or nonosteoporotic. For both the straight-forward screws and the end-plate screws, a statistically significant correlation was observed between torque of insertion and pullout force. The results of this experiment indicate that pedicle screws inserted as end-plate screws do not provide a strength advantage over pedicle screws inserted straight forward, whether the vertebrae are osteoporotic or not.

Pedicle screw fixation strength: pullout versus insertional torque

ObjectivesCement augmentation of pedicle screws could be used to improve screw stability, especially in osteoporotic vertebrae. However, little is known concerning the influence of different screw types and amount of cement applied. Therefore, the aim of this biomechanical in vitro study was to evaluate the effect of cement augmentation on the screw pull-out force in osteoporotic vertebrae, comparing different pedicle screws (solid and fenestrated) and cement volumes (0 mL, 1 mL or 3 mL).Materials and MethodsA total of 54 osteoporotic human cadaver thoracic and lumbar vertebrae were instrumented with pedicle screws (uncemented, solid cemented or fenestrated cemented) and augmented with high-viscosity PMMA cement (0 mL, 1 mL or 3 mL). The insertion torque and bone mineral density were determined. Radiographs and CT scans were undertaken to evaluate cement distribution and cement leakage. Pull-out testing was performed with a material testing machine to measure failure load and stiffness. The paired t-test was used to compare the two screws within each vertebra.ResultsMean failure load was significantly greater for fenestrated cemented screws (+622 N; p ⩽ 0.001) and solid cemented screws (+460 N; p ⩽ 0.001) than for uncemented screws. There was no significant difference between the solid and fenestrated cemented screws (p = 0.5). In the lower thoracic vertebrae, 1 mL cement was enough to significantly increase failure load, while 3 mL led to further significant improvement in the upper thoracic, lower thoracic and lumbar regions.ConclusionConventional, solid pedicle screws augmented with high-viscosity cement provided comparable screw stability in pull-out testing to that of sophisticated and more expensive fenestrated screws. In terms of cement volume, we recommend the use of at least 1 mL in the thoracic and 3 mL in the lumbar spine.Cite this article: C. I. Leichtle, A. Lorenz, S. Rothstock, J. Happel, F. Walter, T. Shiozawa, U. G. Leichtle. Pull-out strength of cemented solid versus fenestrated pedicle screws in osteoporotic vertebrae. Bone Joint Res 2016;5:419–426.

BackgroundWe examined the biomechanical performance of a three-dimensional (3D)-printed vertebra on pedicle screw insertional torque (IT), axial pullout (APO), and stiffness (ST) testing.Materials and methodsSeventy-three anatomically identical L5 vertebral body models (146 pedicles) were printed and tested for IT, APO, and ST using single-threaded pedicle screws of equivalent diameter (6.5 mm), length (40.0 mm), and thread pitch (2.6 mm). Print properties (material, cortical thickness [number of shells], cancellous density [in-fill], in-fill pattern, print orientation) varied among models. One-way analysis of variance was performed to evaluate the effects of variables on outcomes.ResultsThe type of material significantly affected IT, APO, and ST (P < 0.001, all comparisons). For acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) models, in-fill density (25-35%) had a positive linear association with APO (P = 0.002), ST (P = 0.008), and IT (P = 0.10); similarly for the polylactic acid (PLA) models, APO (P = 0.001), IT (P < 0.001), and ST (P = 0.14). For the nylon material type, in-fill density did not affect any tested parameter. For a given in-fill density, material, and print orientation, the in-fill pattern significantly affected IT (P = 0.002) and APO (P = 0.03) but not ST (P = 0.23). Print orientation also significantly affected IT (P < 0.001), APO (P < 0.001), and ST (P = 0.002).Conclusions3D-printed vertebral body models with specific print parameters can be designed to perform analogously to human bone on pedicle screw tests of IT, APO, and ST. Altering the material, in-fill density, in-fill pattern, and print orientation of synthetic vertebral body models could reliably produce a model that mimics bone of a specific bone mineral density.

The authors evaluated the effects of pilot hole preparation technique on insertional torque and axial pullout resistance in osteoporotic thoracic and lumbar vertebrae. Using a probe technique and fluoroscopy, 102 pedicle screws were placed in 51 dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry-proven osteoporotic thoracic and lumbar levels. Screws were inserted using the same-size tapping, one-size-under tapping, or no-tapping technique. Insertional torque and axial pullout resistance were measured. Analysis of variance, Fisher exact test, and regression analysis were performed. Same-size tapping decreased pullout resistance in the lumbar spine. There was no effect on pullout resistance in the thoracic spine. Pullout resistance values were lower for all insertion techniques in the upper thoracic spine. Insertional torque and bone mineral density correlated with pullout resistance in the thoracic and lumbar spine. Tapping decreased pedicle screw pullout resistance in the osteoporotic human lumbar spine, although it did not affect pullout strength in the thoracic spine. Tapping decreased insertional torque in upper thoracic levels. Surgeons should optimize overall construct rigidity when placing thoracic pedicle screws in patients with spinal segment osteoporosis.

Yes, We CAN!

Pull-out force and insertion torque have not been generally used as intraoperative measures for the evaluation of pedicle screw stability because of their invasiveness. On the other hand, resonance frequency analysis is a non-invasive and repeatable technique that has been clinically used in dentistry to evaluate implant stability e.g. by the Osstell apparatus. In this study, the characteristics of the implant stability quotient (ISQ) value obtained by the Osstell apparatus in the field of spinal surgery were investigated. Biomechanical test materials simulating human bone were used to provide a comparative platform for evaluating each fixation strength measure, including pull-out force, insertion torque, and the ISQ value. To perform pull-out force measurement and to repeat pedicle screw insertion and removal, loosening was artificially created, and its effect was investigated. The grade of loosening was quantified on a micro-CT image after pedicle screw removal. In the comparison of the 3 fixation strength measures, the correlations of the ISQ value with the pull-out force (R2 = 0.339 p <0.0001) and the insertion torque (R2 = 0.337 p <0.0001) were lower than the correlation between pull-out force and insertion torque (R2 = 0.918 p <0.0001). On a micro-CT study, the material volume of the internal threads disappeared after destruction of its integrity due to repeated pedicle screw insertion and removal. Material integrity destruction of the internal threads decreased only the pull-out force and the insertion torque, but it did not affect the ISQ value. The ISQ value only decreased when the material volume of the internal threads disappeared, probably because the ISQ value reflects the resistance against a force in the perpendicular direction of the screw, unlike the conventional measures of fixation strength, such as pull-out force and insertion torque, which reflect axial load.

We retrospectively evaluated 488 percutaneous pedicle screws in 110 consecutive patients that had undergone minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MITLIF) to determine the incidence of pedicle screw misplacement and its relevant risk factors. Screw placements were classified based on postoperative computed tomographic findings as "correct", "cortical encroachment" or as "frank penetration". Age, gender, body mass index, bone mineral density, diagnosis, operation time, estimated blood loss (EBL), level of fusion, surgeon's position, spinal alignment, quality/quantity of multifidus muscle, and depth to screw entry point were considered to be demographic and anatomical variables capable of affecting pedicle screw placement. Pedicle dimensions, facet joint arthritis, screw location (ipsilateral or contralateral), screw length, screw diameter, and screw trajectory angle were regarded as screw-related variables. Logistic regression analysis was conducted to examine relations between these variables and the correctness of screw placement. The incidence of cortical encroachment was 12.5% (61 screws), and frank penetration was found for 54 (11.1%) screws. Two patients (0.4%) with medial penetration underwent revision for unbearable radicular pain and foot drop, respectively. The odds ratios of significant risk factors for pedicle screw misplacement were 3.373 (95% CI 1.095-10.391) for obesity, 1.141 (95% CI 1.024-1.271) for pedicle convergent angle, 1.013 (95% CI 1.006-1.065) for EBL >400 cc, and 1.003 (95% CI 1.000-1.006) for cross-sectional area of multifidus muscle. Although percutaneous insertion of pedicle screws was performed safely during MITLIF, several risk factors should be considered to improve placement accuracy.

Biomechanical comparison of the pull-out strengths of lateral mass and pedicle screws in the human cervical spine. Measurements of pedicle dimensions and orientation were compiled. To determine if transpedicular screws provide greater pull-out resistance than lateral mass screws and to investigate the anatomic feasibility of pedicle screw insertion. Cervical pedicle screws have been reported in limited clinical and biomechanical studies, and some quantitative cervical pedicle anatomy has been reported. No direct biomechanical comparisons have been made between lateral mass and pedicle screws. Fifty-six fresh disarticulated human vertebrae (C2-C7) were evaluated with computed tomography to determine morphometry and vertebral body bone density. Lateral mass and pedicle screws were randomized to left versus right. A 3.5-mm cortical screw was used for both techniques, unless a pedicle was narrower than 5.0 mm; then a 2.7-mm cortical screw was used instead. Pedicle wall violations were recorded. Screws were subjected to a uniaxial load to failure. Mean pedicle height, width, and angle with respect to the vertebral midline were tabulated for each level. The mean load-to-failure was 677 N for the cervical pedicle screws and 355 N for the lateral mass screws. No significant correlations for either screw type were found between pull-out strength and bone density, screw length, or vertebral level. Pedicle and lateral mass dimensions were highly variable and not predictive of pull-out strength. Seven (13%) minor pedicle wall violations were observed. Cervical pedicle screws demonstrated a significantly higher resistance to pull-out forces than did lateral mass screws. The variability in pedicle morphometry and orientation requires careful preoperative assessment to determine the suitability of pedicle screw insertion.

The use of thoracic pedicle screws for the treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) has gained widespread popularity. However, the placement of pedicle screws in the deformed spine poses unique challenges, and surgeons experience a learning curve. The in vivo accuracy as determined by computed tomography (CT) of placement of thoracic pedicle screws in the deformed spine as a function of surgeon experience is unknown. We undertook a retrospective review to determine the effect of surgeon experience on the accuracy of thoracic pedicle screw placement in AIS. In 2005, we started to obtain routine postoperative CT scans on patients undergoing a spinal fusion. From a database of these patients, we selected AIS patients, who underwent a posterior spinal fusion. Fifteen consecutive patients for each of the following three groups stratified by attending surgeon experience were selected (N = 45): A) less than 20 cases of all pedicle screw constructs for AIS (surgeons <2 years of practice), B) 20-50 cases (surgeons 2-5 years of practice), and C) greater than 50 cases (surgeons greater than 5 years of practice). Intraoperative evaluation of all screws included probing of the pedicle screw tract, neurophysiologic monitoring, and fluoroscopic confirmation. A total of 856 thoracic pedicle screws were studied. Postoperative CT scans were evaluated by two spine surgeons and a consensus read established as follows: (1) In: intraosseous placement or <or=2-mm breach, (2) Out: >2-mm breach, either medial or lateral. Of the 856 screws, 104 demonstrated a >2-mm breach, for an overall rate of 12.1% (medial = 55, lateral = 49, P = 0.67). When the breach rates were stratified by surgeon experience, there was a trend toward decreased rate of breach for the most experienced surgeons, although this did not attain statistical significance (Group A: 12.7%, Group B: 12.9%, Group C: 10.8%, P = 0.58). However, the most experienced group (C) had a markedly decreased rate of medial breaches (3.5 vs. 7.4% and 8.4% for groups A and B, respectively, P < 0.01). The breach rate for the concave periapical screws was not statistically different from the overall breach rate (13.0% vs. 12.1%, P = 0.93). In conclusion, the overall accuracy of placement of pedicle screws in the deformed spine was 87.9%, with no neurologic, vascular, or visceral complications. Meticulous technique allows spine surgeons with a range of surgical experience to accurately and safely place thoracic pedicle screws in the deformed spine. The most experienced surgeons demonstrated the lowest rate of medial breaches.

35. How many screws are necessary to be considered an experienced surgeon for freehand placement of thoracolumbar pedicle screws? Analysis of the learning curve using the cumulative summation test for learning curve (LC-CUSUM)

The medial cortical pedicle screw—a new technique for cervical pedicle screw placement with partial drilling of medial cortex