Determination of the in vivo posterior loading environment of the Coflex interlaminar-interspinous implant
- PMID: 20004622
- DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2009.10.010
Determination of the in vivo posterior loading environment of the Coflex interlaminar-interspinous implant
Abstract
Background context: The in vivo loading environment of load-bearing implants is generally largely unknown. Loads are typically approximated from cadaver tests or biomechanical calculations for the preclinical assessment of a device's safety and efficacy.
Purpose: To determine the actual in vivo loading environment of an elastic interlaminar-interspinous implant (Coflex).
Study design: A retrospective radiographic study to noninvasively measure the in vivo implant loads of 176 patients.
Methods: For this study, neutral, flexion, and extension radiographs were quantitatively analyzed using validated image analysis technology. The angle between the Coflex arms was measured for each radiograph and statistically evaluated. Separately, the Coflex implant was characterized using mechanical test data and finite element analysis, which resulted in a load-deformation formula that describes the implant load as a function of its size and elastic deformation. Using the formula and the elastic implant deformation data obtained from the radiographic analysis, the exact implant load was calculated for each patient and each posture. For statistical analysis, the patients were grouped by indication and procedure, which resulted in 12 different groups. The determined loads were compared with the strength of the posterior lumbar spinal elements obtained from the literature and with the static and dynamic mechanical limits of the Coflex interlaminar-interspinous implant.
Results: The force data were independent of implant size, diagnosis (with one exception), number of levels of the decompression procedure, number of levels of implantations (one or two), and follow-up time. The median compressive force acting on the Coflex implant was found to be 45.8 N. The maximum load change between flexion and extension was 140 N; the maximum overall load exceeded 239 N in extension.
Conclusions: The average loads exerted by the Coflex implant on the spinous process and lamina are 11.3% and 7.0% of their respective static failure load. The implant fatigue strength is significantly higher than the measured median force, which explains the extremely rare observation of a Coflex fatigue failure.
Copyright 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Similar articles
-
Biomechanical comparison of effects of the Dynesys and Coflex dynamic stabilization systems on range of motion and loading characteristics in the lumbar spine: a finite element study.Int J Med Robot. 2015 Dec;11(4):400-5. doi: 10.1002/rcs.1636. Epub 2015 Jan 23. Int J Med Robot. 2015. PMID: 25643936
-
Finite element analysis and design of an interspinous device using topology optimization.Med Biol Eng Comput. 2019 Jan;57(1):89-98. doi: 10.1007/s11517-018-1838-8. Epub 2018 Jul 7. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2019. PMID: 29981052
-
Can a modified interspinous spacer prevent instability in axial rotation and lateral bending? A biomechanical in vitro study resulting in a new idea.Clin Biomech (Bristol). 2008 Feb;23(2):242-7. doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2007.09.004. Epub 2007 Nov 5. Clin Biomech (Bristol). 2008. PMID: 17981380
-
[The interspinous U implant (now Coflex): long-term outcome, study overview and differential indication].Orthopade. 2010 Jun;39(6):595-601. doi: 10.1007/s00132-009-1589-1. Orthopade. 2010. PMID: 20454889 Review. German.
-
How to improve the mechanical safety of a novel spinal implant while saving costs and time.JOR Spine. 2024 Dec 25;7(4):e70026. doi: 10.1002/jsp2.70026. eCollection 2024 Dec. JOR Spine. 2024. PMID: 39726899 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Disease with a Novel Interlaminar Screw Elastic Spacer Technique: A Finite Element Analysis.Bioengineering (Basel). 2023 Oct 16;10(10):1204. doi: 10.3390/bioengineering10101204. Bioengineering (Basel). 2023. PMID: 37892934 Free PMC article.
-
Perspective: Efficacy and outcomes for different lumbar interspinous devices (ISD) vs. open surgery to treat lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS).Surg Neurol Int. 2024 Jan 19;15:17. doi: 10.25259/SNI_1007_2023. eCollection 2024. Surg Neurol Int. 2024. PMID: 38344078 Free PMC article. Review.
-
[Biomechanics of interspinous spacers].Orthopade. 2010 Jun;39(6):565-72. doi: 10.1007/s00132-009-1587-3. Orthopade. 2010. PMID: 20480134 German.
-
The effect of interlaminar Coflex stabilization in the topping-off procedure on local and global spinal sagittal alignment.BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2023 Feb 11;24(1):116. doi: 10.1186/s12891-023-06231-1. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2023. PMID: 36774472 Free PMC article.
-
Elastic resistance of the spine: Why does motion preservation surgery almost fail?World J Clin Cases. 2013 Jul 16;1(4):134-9. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v1.i4.134. World J Clin Cases. 2013. PMID: 24303484 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources