Skip to main content

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol.
Sec. Biomechanics
Volume 12 - 2024 | doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2024.1445806

Biomechanical and Clinical Evaluation of PSO, Modified PSO and VCR treating OVCF: a Finite Element Analysis

Provisionally accepted
Junyu Li Junyu Li 1,2,3Lizhi Xu Lizhi Xu 1,2,3Haotian Wang Haotian Wang 1,2,3Yinhao Liu Yinhao Liu 1,2,3Zhuoran Sun Zhuoran Sun 1,2,3Yongqiang Wang Yongqiang Wang 1,2,3Miao Yu Miao Yu 1,2,3Weishi Li Weishi Li 1,2,3Yan Zeng Yan Zeng 1,2,3*
  • 1 Department of Orthopedics, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China
  • 2 Engineering Research Center of Bone and Joint Precision Medicine, Beijing, China
  • 3 Beijing Key Laboratory of Spinal Disease Research, Beijing, China

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

    Objective: To confirm the effect of surgery on spinal column biomechanics and to provide theoretical support for the differences in complications.Methods: 33 continuous patients with no significant difference in risk factors related to the complications were enrolled in this retrospective study. Sagittal parameters were measured in the pre-, post-operative and following-up orthostatic flat films. An finite element(FE) model was created using CT scanning from a female volunteer with osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture(OVCF) but no other severe spinal deformities. Pedicle subtraction osteotomy(PSO), vertebral column resection(VCR) and modified PSO(mPSO) for OVCF were simulated on FE model. Stress distribution characteristics, load sharing, strain displacement and strain angle change were measured.Results: Clinical -All differences in preoperative spinal sagittal parameters were not statistically significant. mPSO showed it is superior to PSO and VCR in multiple postoperative and following-up spinal sagittal parameters. The operation duration and intraoperative blood loss of mPSO are less than the other two. For postoperative complications, no statistically significant differences were observed. Biomechanical -Six operating conditions (flexion, extension, left/right bending, left/right twisting) for each post-operative FE model have been examined. In most conditions, the displacement of mPSO is similar to that of PSO, with both larger than that of VCR. All the maximum equivalent stress on the vertebral body is within the safe range. The stress is mainly distributed on the T10 vertebral body and the fixed vertebral body L2, while the stress of VCR is greater than that of mPSO and PSO. The intervertebral disc pressure is highest in VCR, followed by PSO, and lowest in mPSO under all conditions. The maximum pressure on the intervertebral discs is located between T10 and T11.Conclusions: The finite element analysis showed that mPSO has a similar spine stability to PSO, and possibly creates a better environment for bone-to-bone fusion and prevents adjacent segments degeneration. Combined with its smaller surgical risks, we believe that the modified pedicle subtraction osteotomy may be an appropriate surgical intervention for indicated cases of OVCF.

    Keywords: Osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture, Osteoporotic adult spinal deformity, Finite Element Analysis, OVCF, Open surgery

    Received: 08 Jun 2024; Accepted: 12 Nov 2024.

    Copyright: © 2024 Li, Xu, Wang, Liu, Sun, Wang, Yu, Li and Zeng. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

    * Correspondence: Yan Zeng, Department of Orthopedics, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China

    Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.