ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2022
Application of dual-trajectory screws in revision surgery for lumbar adjacent segment disease: a finite element study.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Biomechanical changes of different cement volumes at the thoracolumbar vertebrae in osteoporotic compression fractures: a finite element analysis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- Finite element analysis of pedicle screw fixation biomechanics and adjacent segment degeneration in varied bone conditions.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Biomechanical impact of cortical bone vs. traditional pedicle screw trajectories: a finite element study on lumbar spinal instrumentation.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Article
- Finite element biomechanical analysis of 3D printed intervertebral fusion cage in osteoporotic population.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2024Article
- Biomechanical differences between two different shapes of oblique lumbar interbody fusion cages on whether to add posterior internal fixation system: a finite element analysis.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2023Article
- Biomechanical properties of lumbar vertebral ring apophysis cage under endplate injury: a finite element analysis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2023Article
- Biomechanical evaluation of different sizes of 3D printed cage in lumbar interbody fusion-a finite element analysis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2023Article
- A comparative analysis of using cage acrossing the vertebral ring apophysis in normal and osteoporotic models under endplate injury: a finite element analysis.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2023Article
- Bibliometric and Visualization Analysis of Biomechanical Research on Lumbar Intervertebral Disc.Journal of pain research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAdvancements in medicine and the popularity of lumbar fusion surgery have made lumbar adjacent segment disease (ASDz) increasingly common, but there is no mature plan for guiding its surgical treatment. Therefore, in this study, four different finite element (FE) ASDz models were designed and their biomechanical characteristics were analysed to provide a theoretical basis for clinical workers to choose the most appropriate revision scheme for ASDz.
methodsAccording to whether internal fixation was retained, different FE models were created to simulate ASDz revision surgery, and flexion, extension, axial rotation and lateral bending were simulated by loading. The biomechanical characteristics of the adjacent segments of the intervertebral disc and the internal fixation system and the range of motion (ROM) of the lumbar vertebrae were analysed.
resultsThe difference in the ROM of the fixed segment between FE models that did or did not retain the original internal fixation was less than 0.1°, and the difference was not significant. However, the stress of the screw-rod system when the original internal fixation was retained and prolonged fixation was performed with dual-trajectory screws was less than that when the original internal fixation was removed and prolonged fixation was performed with a long bar. Especially in axial rotation, the difference between models A and B is the largest, and the difference in peak stress reached 30 MPa. However, for the ASDz revision surgery segment, the endplate stress between the two models was the lowest, and the intradiscal pressure (IDP) of the adjacent segment was not significantly different between different models.
conclusionAlthough ASDz revision surgery by retaining the original internal fixation and prolonging fixation with dual-trajectory screws led to an increase in stress in the fusion segment endplate, it provides stability similar to ASDz revision surgery by removing the original internal fixation and prolonging fixation with a long bar and does not lead to a significant change in the IDP of the adjacent segment while avoiding a greater risk of rod fracture.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.