AUTHOR=Rasmussen John , Iversen Kristoffer , Engelund Bjørn Keller , Rasmussen Sten TITLE=Biomechanical Evaluation of the Effect of Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery Compared with Traditional Approaches in Lifting Tasks JOURNAL=Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology VOLUME=9 YEAR=2021 URL=https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/bioengineering-and-biotechnology/articles/10.3389/fbioe.2021.724854 DOI=10.3389/fbioe.2021.724854 ISSN=2296-4185 ABSTRACT=

Fusion of spinal vertebrae can be accomplished by different surgical approaches. We investigated Traditional Open Spine Surgery (TOSS) versus Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery (MISS). While TOSS sacrifices spine muscles originating or inserting on the affected vertebrae, MISS seeks to minimize the approach-related morbidity and preserve the tendon attachments of the muscles in the area. We captured 3-D motions of the full body of one healthy subject performing a variety of 10 kg box lifting operations representing activities-of-daily-living that are likely to challenge the spine biomechanically. The motion data were transferred to a full-body biomechanical model with a detailed representation of the biomechanics of the spine, and simulations of the internal spine loads and muscle forces were performed under a baseline configuration and muscle configurations typical for TOSS respectively MISS for the cases of L3/L4, L4/L5, L5/S1, L4/S1 and L3/L5 fusions. The computational model was then used to investigate the biomechanical differences between surgeries. The simulations revealed that joint reaction forces are more affected by both surgical approaches for lateral lifting motions than for sagittal plane motions, and there are indications that individuals with fused joints, regardless of the approach, should be particularly careful with asymmetrical lifts. The MISS and TOSS approaches shift the average loads of different muscle groups in different ways. TOSS generally leads to higher post-operative muscle loads than MISS in the investigated cases, but the differences are smaller than could be expected, given the differences of surgical technique.