A biomechanical comparison of polymethylmethacrylate-reinforced and expansive pedicle screws in pedicle-screw revisions

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.authoridASCI, MURAT/0000-0002-8495-3161;
dc.authorwosidASCI, MURAT/JKI-9962-2023
dc.authorwosidBostan, Bora/AGZ-2554-2022
dc.authorwosidSen, Cengiz CS/U-1618-2017
dc.authorwosidAsci, Murat/AAI-5121-2020
dc.authorwosidElmali, Nurzat/A-1017-2014
dc.contributor.authorBostan, Bora
dc.contributor.authorEsenkaya, Irfan
dc.contributor.authorGunes, Taner
dc.contributor.authorErdem, Mehmet
dc.contributor.authorAsci, Murat
dc.contributor.authorKelestemur, M. Halidun
dc.contributor.authorSen, Cengiz
dc.date.accessioned2024-08-04T20:32:18Z
dc.date.available2024-08-04T20:32:18Z
dc.date.issued2009
dc.departmentİnönü Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractObjectives: Different techniques and choices exist for revision of pedicle screws, two of which are pedicle screw combined with cement augmentation and expansive pedicle screw fixation. This biomechanical study was designed to compare the pullout strengths of two different revision techniques. Methods: Fourteen lumbar vertebrae obtained from four calves (mean age 15 months) were divided into two groups equal in number. Monoaxial 6.0-mm pedicle screws were inserted into the right pedicles, and axial pullout testing was performed at a rate of 10 mm/min and failure strengths were recorded. Revision was performed with the same-sized pedicle screws reinforced with polymethylmethacrylate in group 1, and with 7.0-mm expansive pedicle screws in group 2, and pullout testing was repeated to record maximum revision pullout strengths. Results: The mean pullout strengths recorded before and after revision were significantly different in both groups, being 2,162.9 +/- 718.5 N and 2,794.3 +/- 979.2 N in group 1 (p=0.041) and 2,605.0 +/- 487.6 N and 3,327.1 +/- 640.8 N in group 2 (p=0.012), respectively. However, the mean pullout strengths recorded before and after revision did not differ significantly between the two groups (p>0.05). Conclusion: Our results showed that expansive pedicle screws 1 mm larger in diameter provide similar pullout strengths to those of same-sized, polymethylmethacrylate-reinforced screws in revision of pedicle screw fixation, suggesting that they can be preferred with the additional advantages of ease of application and avoiding risks for pedicle fracture and cement leakage.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.3944/AOTT.2009.272
dc.identifier.endpage276en_US
dc.identifier.issn1017-995X
dc.identifier.issue3en_US
dc.identifier.pmid19717948en_US
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-77649214283en_US
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ2en_US
dc.identifier.startpage272en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.3944/AOTT.2009.272
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11616/94992
dc.identifier.volume43en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000269083100015en_US
dc.identifier.wosqualityN/Aen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Scienceen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopusen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMeden_US
dc.language.isotren_US
dc.publisherTurkish Assoc Orthopaedics Traumatologyen_US
dc.relation.ispartofActa Orthopaedica Et Traumatologica Turcicaen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectBiomechanicsen_US
dc.subjectbone screwsen_US
dc.subjectcattleen_US
dc.subjectlumbar vertebrae/surgeryen_US
dc.subjectspinal fusion/instrumentationen_US
dc.subjectspine/surgeryen_US
dc.titleA biomechanical comparison of polymethylmethacrylate-reinforced and expansive pedicle screws in pedicle-screw revisionsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayın Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu