Sacroiliac joint stability: Finite element analysis of implant number, orientation, and superior implant length (original) (raw)
Related papers
International Journal of Spine Surgery, 2021
Background: The sacroiliac joint (SIJ) is responsible for 15%-30% of chronic low back pain and fusion is increasingly used to alleviate chronic SIJ pain in adults. However, questions remain as to the most effective implant patterns to stabilize the joint. The objective of this biomechanical study was to evaluate how different implant spacing, configuration and quantity effect range of motion (ROM) of a synthetic foam SIJ model. Methods: Triangular SIJ fusion implants were tested in six patterns using three implants, and two patterns with two implants (n ¼ 5/pattern). Linear, triangular, and angled (108 or 208) implant patterns were used with spacing of 13 or 22 mm between implants. Implants were placed through a denser polyurethane foam block (0.32 g/cm 3) representing the ilium and into a less dense block representing the sacrum (0.16 g/cm 3) to a depth 30 mm with a 2-mm gap between blocks. Cyclic torsion and shear testing were conducted for 10,000 cycles and ROM was recorded. Pullout testing was conducted on non-cycled (n ¼ 10) implants and individually on all implants after construct cycling. Results: ROM was significantly lower for all 22-mm implant patterns compared to the 13 mm linear pattern after cyclic loading in both torsion and shear. The use of three implants provided 60% and 86% greater stability, respectively, than two implants with spacing of 22 and 13 mm. Pullout resistance followed similar trends with the lowest forces occurring in closely spaced patterns that used two implants. Conclusions: This study demonstrated that the use of three implants and maximizing the spacing between implants might provide greater stability to the SIJ. If implants must be placed closely, then nonlinear patterns may improve construct stability.
The International Journal of Spine Surgery, 2022
Background: The sacroiliac joint (SIJ) transfers the load of the upper body to the lower extremities while allowing a variable physiological movement among individuals. The axis of rotation (AoR) and center of rotation (CoR) of the SIJ can be evaluated to analyze the stability of the SIJ, including when the sacrum is fixed. The purpose of this study was to determine how load intensity affects the SIJ for the intact model and to characterize how sacropelvic fixation performed with different techniques affects this joint. Methods: Five T10-pelvis models were used: (1) intact model; (2) pedicle screws and rods in T10-S1; (3)pedicle screws and rods in T10-S1, and bilateral S2 alar-iliac screws (S2AI); (4) pedicle screws and rods in T10-S1, bilateral S2AI screws, and triangular implants inserted bilaterally in a sacral alar-iliac trajectory ; and (5) pedicle screws and rods in T10-S1, bilateral S2AI screws, and 2 bilateral triangular implants inserted in a lateral trajectory. Outputs of these models under flexion-extension were compared: AoR and CoR of the SIJ at incremental steps from 0 to 7.5 Nm for the intact model and AoR and CoR of the SIJ for the instrumented models at 7.5 Nm. Results: The intact model was validated against an in vivo study by comparing range of motion and displacement of the sacrum. Increasing the load intensity for the intact model led to an increase of the rotation of the sacrum but did not change the CoR. Comparison among the instrumented models showed that sacropelvic fixation techniques reduced the rotation of the sacrum and stabilized the SIJ, in particular with triangular implants. Conclusion: The study outcomes suggest that increasing load intensity increases the rotation of the sacrum but does not influence the CoR, and use of sacropelvic fixation increases the stability of the SIJ, especially when triangular implants are employed. Clinical Relevance: The choice of the instrumentation strategy for sacropelvic fixation affects the stability of the construct in terms of both range of motion and axes of rotation, with direct consequences on the risk of failure and mobilization. Clinical studies should be performed to confirm these biomechanical findings.
Biomechanical Stability of Primary and Revision Sacroiliac Joint Fusion Devices: A Cadaveric Study
Global Spine Journal, 2020
Study Design:An in vitro biomechanics study.Objective:To evaluate the efficacy of triangular titanium implants in providing mechanical stabilization to a sacroiliac joint with primary and revision sized implants.Methods:Ten lumbopelvic cadaveric specimens were tested in 4 stages: intact, pubic symphysis sectioned, primary, and simulated revision. Primary treatment was performed using 3 laterally placed triangular titanium implants. To simulate revision conditions before and after bone ingrowth and ongrowth on the implants, 7.5-mm and 10.75-mm implants were randomly assigned to one side of each specimen during the simulated revision stage. A 6 degrees of freedom spinal loading frame was used to load specimens in 4 directions: flexion extension, lateral bending, axial torsion, and axial compression. Biomechanical evaluation was based on measures of sacroiliac joint rotational and translational motion.Results:Both primary and revision implants showed the ability to reduce translational...
In Vitro Biomechanical Evaluation of a Novel, Minimally Invasive, Sacroiliac Joint Fixation Device
International journal of spine surgery, 2018
Sacroiliac (SI) joint pathology may result in low-back pain, which causes substantial disability. Treatment failure with operative management of SI pain may be related to incomplete fusion of the joint and to fixation failure. The objective of this study was to evaluate the initial biomechanical stability of SI joint fixation with a novel implantable device in an in vitro human cadaveric model. The right and left sides of 3 cadaveric L4-pelvis specimens were tested (1) intact, (2) destabilized, and (3) instrumented with an implantable SI joint fixation device using a simulated single-stance load condition. Right-leg and left-leg stance data were grouped together for a sample size of 6, and angular range of motion (ROM) was determined during application of flexion-extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation bending moments to a limit of 7.5 Nm. Following intact testing, destabilization by severing the posterior SI joint capsule and ligaments and the pubic symphysis reliably produc...
Sacroiliac Joint Fusion Minimally Affects Adjacent Lumbar Segment Motion: A Finite Element Study
The International Journal of Spine Surgery, 2015
Background Adjacent segment disease is a recognized consequence of fusion in the spinal column. Fusion of the sacroiliac joint is an effective method of pain reduction. Although effective, the consequences of sacroiliac joint fusion and the potential for adjacent segment disease for the adjacent lumbar spinal levels is unknown. The objective of this study was to quantify the change in range of motion of the sacroiliac joint and the adjacent lumbar spinal motion segments due to sacroiliac joint fusion and compare these changes to previous literature to assess the potential for adjacent segment disease in the lumbar spine. Methods An experimentally validated finite element model of the lumbar spine and pelvis was used to simulate a fusion of the sacroiliac joint using three laterally placed triangular implants (iFuse Implant System, SI-BONE, Inc., San Jose, CA). The range of motion of the sacroiliac joint and the adjacent lumbar spinal motion segments were calculated using a hybrid loading protocol and compared with the intact range of motion in flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation. Results The range of motions of the treated sacroiliac joints were reduced in flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation, by 56.6%, 59.5%, 27.8%, and 53.3%, respectively when compared with the intact condition. The stiffening of the sacroiliac joint resulted in increases at the adjacent lumbar motion segment (L5-S1) for flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation, of 3.0%, 3.7%, 1.1%, and 4.6%, respectively. Conclusions Fusion of the sacroiliac joint resulted in substantial (> 50%) reductions in flexion, extension, and axial rotation of the sacroiliac joint with minimal (< 5%) increases in range of motion in the lumbar spine. Although the predicted increases in lumbar range of motion are minimal after sacroiliac joint fusion, the long-term clinical results remain to be investigated.
Medical Devices: Evidence and Research, 2014
Introduction: Sacroiliac (SI) joint pain has become a recognized factor in low back pain. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of a minimally invasive surgical SI joint fusion procedure on the in vitro biomechanics of the SI joint before and after cyclic loading. Methods: Seven cadaveric specimens were tested under the following conditions: intact, posterior ligaments (PL) and pubic symphysis (PS) cut, treated (three implants placed), and after 5,000 cycles of flexion-extension. The range of motion (ROM) in flexion-extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation was determined with an applied 7.5 N ⋅ m moment using an optoelectronic system. Results for each ROM were compared using a repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) with a Holm-Šidák post-hoc test. Results: Placement of three fusion devices decreased the flexion-extension ROM. Lateral bending and axial rotation were not significantly altered. All PL/PS cut and post-cyclic ROMs were larger than in the intact condition. The 5,000 cycles of flexion-extension did not lead to a significant increase in any ROMs. Discussion: In the current model, placement of three 7.0 mm iFuse Implants significantly decreased the flexion-extension ROM. Joint ROM was not increased by 5,000 flexion-extension cycles.
Medical Devices: Evidence and Research, 2014
Sacroiliac (SI) joint pain has become a recognized factor in low back pain. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of a minimally invasive surgical SI joint fusion procedure on the in vitro biomechanics of the SI joint before and after cyclic loading. Methods: Seven cadaveric specimens were tested under the following conditions: intact, posterior ligaments (PL) and pubic symphysis (PS) cut, treated (three implants placed), and after 5,000 cycles of flexion-extension. The range of motion (ROM) in flexion-extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation was determined with an applied 7.5 N ⋅ m moment using an optoelectronic system. Results for each ROM were compared using a repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) with a Holm-Šidák post-hoc test. Results: Placement of three fusion devices decreased the flexion-extension ROM. Lateral bending and axial rotation were not significantly altered. All PL/PS cut and post-cyclic ROMs were larger than in the intact condition. The 5,000 cycles of flexion-extension did not lead to a significant increase in any ROMs. Discussion: In the current model, placement of three 7.0 mm iFuse Implants significantly decreased the flexion-extension ROM. Joint ROM was not increased by 5,000 flexion-extension cycles.
Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine, 2021
OBJECTIVE S2-alar-iliac (S2AI) screw fixation effectively ensures stability and enhances fusion in long-segment constructs. Nevertheless, pelvic fixation is associated with a high rate of mechanical failure. Because of the transarticular nature of the S2AI screw, adding a second point of fixation may provide additional stability and attenuate strains. The objective of the study was to evaluate changes in stability and strain with the integration of a sacroiliac (SI) joint fusion device, implanted through a novel posterior SI approach, supplemental to posterior long-segment fusion. METHODS L1-pelvis human cadaveric specimens underwent pure moment (7.5 Nm) and compression (400 N) tests in the following conditions: 1) intact, 2) L2–S1 pedicle screw and rod fixation with L5–S1 interbody fusion, 3) added S2AI screws, and 4) added bilateral SI joint fixation (SIJF). The range of motion (ROM), rod strain, and screw bending moments (S1 and S2AI) were analyzed. RESULTS S2AI fixation decrease...
Biomechanical evaluation of sacroiliac joint fixation with decortication
The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society, 2018
Fusion typically consists of joint preparation, grafting, and rigid fixation. Fusion has been successfully used to treat symptomatic disruptions of the sacroiliac joint (SIJ) and degenerative sacroiliitis using purpose-specific, threaded implants. The biomechanical performance of these systems is important but has not been studied. The objective of this study was to compare two techniques for placing primary (12.5 mm) and secondary (8.5 mm) implants across the SIJ. This is a human cadaveric biomechanical study of SIJ fixation. Pure-moment testing was performed on 14 human SIJs in flexion-extension (FE), lateral bending (LB), and axial rotation (AR) with motion measured across the SIJ. Specimens were tested intact, after destabilization (cutting the pubic symphysis), after decortication and implantation of a primary 12.5-mm implant at S1 plus an 8.5-mm secondary implant at either S1 (S1-S1, n=8) or S2 (S1-S2, n=8), after cyclic loading, and after removal of the secondary implant. Ran...
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, 2020
Background A number of minimally invasive sacroiliac (SI) joint fusion solutions for placing implants exist, with reduced post-operative pain and improved outcomes compared to open procedures. The objective of this study was to compare two MIS SI joint fusion approaches that place implants directly across the joint by comparing the ilium and sacrum bone characteristics and SI joint separation along the implant trajectories. Methods Nine cadaveric specimens (n = 9) were CT scanned and the left and right ilium and sacrum were segmented. The bone density, bone volume fraction, and SI joint gap distance were calculated along lateral and posterolateral trajectories and compared using analysis of variance between the two orientations. Results Iliac bone density, indicated by the mean Hounsfield Unit, was significantly greater for each lateral trajectory compared to posterolateral. The volume of cortical bone in the ilium was greater for the middle lateral trajectory compared to all others...