Biomechanical comparison of a novel transoral atlantoaxial anchored cage with established fixation technique - a finite element analysis

• Published in: BMC musculoskeletal disorders Vol. 16; no. 1; p. 261
• Main Authors: Zhang, Bao-cheng, Liu, Hai-bo, Cai, Xian-hua, Wang, Zhi-hua, Xu, Feng, Kang, Hui, Ding, Ran, Luo, Xiao-qing
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England BioMed Central Ltd 22.09.2015; BioMed Central
• Subjects: Atlanto-Axial Joint - surgery; Comparative analysis; Finite Element Analysis; Finite element method; Humans; Joint Dislocations - surgery; Methods; Musculoskeletal diseases; Orthopedic Procedures - instrumentation; Orthopedic Procedures - methods
• ISSN: 1471-2474; 1471-2474
• DOI: 10.1186/s12891-015-0662-7

The transoral atlantoaxial reduction plate (TARP) fixation has been introduced to achieve reduction, decompression, fixation and fusion of C1-C2 through a transoral-only approach. However, it may also be associated with potential disadvantages, including dysphagia and load shielding of the bone graft. To prevent potential disadvantages related to TARP fixation, a novel transoral atlantoaxial fusion cage with integrated plate (Cage + Plate) device for stabilization of the C1-C2 segment is designed. The aims of the present study were to compare the biomechanical differences between Cage + Plate device and Cage + TARP device for the treatment of basilar invagination (BI) with irreducible atlantoaxial dislocation (IAAD). A detailed, nonlinear finite element model (FEM) of the intact upper cervical spine had been developed and validated. Then a FEM of an unstable BI model treated with Cage + Plate fixation, was compared to that with Cage + TARP fixation. All models were subjected to vertical load with pure moments in flexion, extension, lateral bending and axial rotation. Range of motion (ROM) of C1-C2 segment and maximum von Mises Stress of the C2 endplate and bone graft were quantified for the two devices. Both devices significantly reduced ROM compared with the intact state. In comparison with the Cage + Plate model, the Cage + TARP model reduced the ROM by 82.5 %, 46.2 %, 10.0 % and 74.3 % in flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation. The Cage + Plate model showed a higher increase stresses on C2 endplate and bone graft than the Cage + TARP model in all motions. Our results indicate that the novel Cage + Plate device may provide lower biomechanical stability than the Cage + TARP device in flexion, extension, and axial rotation, however, it may reduce stress shielding of the bone graft for successful fusion and minimize the risk of postoperative dysphagia. Clinical trials are now required to validate the reproducibility and advantages of our findings using this anchored cage for the treatment of BI with IAAD.