Comparative finite element analysis of posterior short segment fixation constructs with or without intermediate screws in the fractured vertebrae for the treatment of type a thoracolumbar fracture

AbstractSix-screw short-segment posterior fixation for thoracolumbar fractures, which involves intermediate screws at the fractured vertebrae has been proposed to reduce the rates of kyphosis recurrence and implant failure. Yet, little is known about the mechanisms and biomechanical responses by which intermediate screws at the fracture vertebrae enhance fixation strength. The objective of this study was to investigate the biomechanical properties that are associated with the augmentation of intermediate screws in relation to the severity of type A thoracolumbar fracture using finite element analysis. Short-segment stabilization models with or without augmentation screws at fractured vertebrae were established based on finite element model of moderate compressive fractures, severe compressive fractures and burst fractures. The spinal stiffness, stresses at the implanted hardware, and axial displacement of the bony defect were measured and compared under mechanical loading conditions. All six-screw stabilization showed a decreased range of motion in extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation compared to the traditional four-screw fixation models. Burst thoracolumbar fracture benefited more from augmentation of intermediate screws at the fracture vertebrae. The stress of the rod in six-screw models increased while decreased that of pedicle screws. Our results suggested that patients with more unstable fractures might achieve greater benefits from augmentation of intermediate screws at the fracture vertebrae. Augmentation of intermediate screws at the fracture vertebrae is recommended for patients with higher wedge-shaped or burst fractures to reduce the risk of hardware failure and postoperative re-collapse of injured vertebrae.Keywords: Thoracolumbar fracturefinite element analysispedicle screw instrumentationbiomechanics Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.Additional informationFundingThe authors declare that this research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.