Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2008 Aug;17(8):1057-65.
doi: 10.1007/s00586-008-0667-0. Epub 2008 May 21.

The effect of dynamic, semi-rigid implants on the range of motion of lumbar motion segments after decompression

Affiliations

The effect of dynamic, semi-rigid implants on the range of motion of lumbar motion segments after decompression

Tobias L Schulte et al. Eur Spine J. 2008 Aug.

Abstract

Undercutting decompression is a common surgical procedure for the therapy of lumbar spinal canal stenosis. Segmental instability, due to segmental degeneration or iatrogenic decompression is a typical problem that is clinically addressed by fusion, or more recently by semi-rigid stabilization devices. The objective of this experimental biomechanical study was to investigate the influence of spinal decompression alone, as well as in conjunction with two semi-rigid stabilizing implants (Wallis, Dynesys) on the range of motion (ROM) of lumbar spine segments. A total of 21 fresh-frozen human lumbar spine motion segments were obtained. Range of motion and neutral zone (NZ) were measured in flexion-extension (FE), lateral bending (LAT) and axial rotation (ROT) for each motion segment under four conditions: (1) with all stabilizing structures intact (PHY), (2) after bilateral undercutting decompression (UDC), (3) after additional implantation of Wallis (UDC-W) and (4) after removal of Wallis and subsequent implantation of Dynesys (UDC-D). Measurements were performed using a sensor-guided industrial robot in a pure-moment-loading mode. Range of motion was defined as the angle covered between loadings of -5 and +5 Nm during the last of three applied motion cycles. Untreated physiologic segments showed the following mean ROM: FE 6.6 degrees , LAT 7.4 degrees , ROT 3.9 degrees . After decompression, a significant increase of ROM was observed: 26% FE, 6% LAT, 12% ROT. After additional implantation of a semi-rigid device, a decrease in ROM compared to the situation after decompression alone was observed with a reduction of 66 and 75% in FE, 6 and 70% in LAT, and 5 and 22% in ROT being observed for the Wallis and Dynesys, respectively. When the flexion and extension contribution to ROM was separated, the Wallis implant restricted extension by 69% and flexion by 62%, the Dynesys by 73 and 75%, respectively. Compared to the intact status, instrumentation following decompression led to a ROM reduction of 58 and 68% in FE, 1 and 68% in LAT, -6 and 13% in ROT, 61 and 65% in extension and 54 and 70% in flexion for Wallis and Dynesys. The effect of the implants on NZ corresponded to that on ROM. In conclusion, implantation of the Wallis and Dynesys devices following decompression leads to a restriction of ROM in all motion planes investigated. Flexion-extension is most affected by both implants. The Dynesys implant leads to an additional strong restriction in lateral bending. Rotation is only mildly affected by both implants. Wallis and Dynesys restrict not only isolated extension, but also flexion. These biomechanical results support the hypothesis that postoperatively, the semi-rigid implants provide a primary stabilizing function directly. Whether they can improve the clinical outcome must still be verified in prospective clinical investigations.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Sensor-guided robot KUKA (KUKA Roboter GmbH, Augsburg, Germany) applying pure moments on a lumbar motion segment
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Different treatment conditions of a lumbar motion segment tested (view from posterior). Top left: physiologic with all stabilizing ligaments intact; top right: following bilateral undercutting decompression; bottom left: after additional implantation of Wallis; bottom right: after additional implantation of Dynesys®
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Mean ROM (in degrees) of all 21 segments including 95% confidence interval. PHY segments with all stabilizing structures intact, UDC after bilateral undercutting decompression, UDC-W after additional implantation of Wallis, UDC-D after removal of Wallis and subsequent implantation of Dynesys®. ROM for lateral bending and axial rotation include displacement to the left and right side
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Mean ROM (in degrees) of specimens grouped according to segmental level in the four investigated conditions in flexion–extension, lateral bending and axial rotation

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Aalto TJ, Malmivaara A, Kovacs F, Herno A, Alen M, Salmi L, Kroger H, Andrade J, Jimenez R, Tapaninaho A, Turunen V, Savolainen S, Airaksinen O. Preoperative predictors for postoperative clinical outcome in lumbar spinal stenosis: systematic review. Spine. 2006;31:E648–E663. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000231727.88477.da. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Anderson PA, Tribus CB, Kitchel SH. Treatment of neurogenic claudication by interspinous decompression: application of the X STOP device in patients with lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis. J Neurosurg Spine. 2006;4:463–471. doi: 10.3171/spi.2006.4.6.463. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Benini A. [Lumbar spinal stenosis. An overview 50 years following initial description] Orthopade. 1993;22:257–266. - PubMed
    1. Benini A. [Stenosis of the lumbar spinal canal. Pathophysiology, clinical aspects and therapy] Orthopade. 1997;26:503–514. doi: 10.1007/s132-1997-8286-3. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Christie SD, Song JK, Fessler RG. Dynamic interspinous process technology. Spine. 2005;30:S73–S78. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000174532.58468.6c. - DOI - PubMed