Second-generation bone cement-injectable cannulated pedicle screws for osteoporosis: biomechanical and finite element analyses

Abstract

BackgroundBiomechanical and finite element analyses were performed to investigate the efficacy of second-generation bone cement-injectable cannulated pedicle screws (CICPS) in osteoporosis.MethodsThis study used the biomechanical test module of polyurethane to simulate osteoporotic cancellous bone. Polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) bone cement was used to anchor the pedicle screws in the module. The specimens were divided into two groups for the mechanical tests: the experimental group (second-generation CICPS) and control group (first-generation CICPS). Safety was evaluated using maximum shear force, static bending, and dynamic bending tests. Biomechanical stability evaluations included the maximum axial pullout force and rotary torque tests. X-ray imaging and computed tomography were used to evaluate the distribution of bone cement 24 h after PMMA injection, and stress distribution at the screw fracture and screw–cement–bone interface was assessed using finite element analysis.ResultsMechanical testing revealed that the experimental group (349.8 ± 28.6 N) had a higher maximum axial pullout force than the control group (277.3 ± 8.6 N; P < 0.05). The bending moments of the experimental group (128.5 ± 9.08 N) were comparable to those of the control group (113.4 ± 20.9 N; P > 0.05). The screw-in and spin-out torques of the experimental group were higher than those of the control group (spin-in, 0.793 ± 0.015 vs. 0.577 ± 0.062 N, P < 0.01; spin-out, 0.764 ± 0.027 vs. 0.612 ± 0.049 N, P < 0.01). Bone cement was mainly distributed at the front three-fifths of the screw in both groups, but the distribution was more uniform in the experimental group than in the control group. After pullout, the bone cement was closely connected to the screw, without loosening or fragmentation. In the finite element analysis, stress on the second-generation CICPS was concentrated at the proximal screw outlet, whereas stress on the first-generation CICPS was concentrated at the screw neck, and the screw–bone cement–bone interface stress of the experimental group was smaller than that of the control group.ConclusionThese findings suggest that second-generation CICPS have higher safety and stability than first-generation CICPS and may be a superior choice for the treatment of osteoporosis.