↓ Skip to main content

Hybrid pedicle screw and modified cortical bone trajectory technique in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion at L4-L5 segment: finite element analysis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, April 2023
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
4 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Hybrid pedicle screw and modified cortical bone trajectory technique in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion at L4-L5 segment: finite element analysis
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, April 2023
DOI 10.1186/s12891-023-06385-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alafate Kahaer, Rui Zhang, Yixi Wang, Haopeng Luan, Abulikemu Maimaiti, Dongshan Liu, Wenjie Shi, Tao Zhang, Hailong Guo, Paerhati Rexiti

Abstract

Investigate the biomechanical properties of the hybrid fixation technique with bilateral pedicle screw (BPS) and bilateral modified cortical bone trajectory screw (BMCS) in L4-L5 transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF).  Three finite element (FE) models of the L1-S1 lumbar spine were established according to the three human cadaveric lumbar specimens. BPS-BMCS (BPS at L4 and BMCS at L5), BMCS-BPS (BMCS at L4 and BPS at L5), BPS-BPS (BPS at L4 and L5), and BMCS-BMCS (BMCS at L4 and L5) were implanted into the L4-L5 segment of each FE model. The range of motion (ROM) of the L4-L5 segment, von Mises stress of the fixation, intervertebral cage, and rod were compared under a 400-N compressive load with 7.5 Nm moments in flexion, extension, bending, and rotation.  BPS-BMCS technique has the lowest ROM in extension and rotation, and BMCS-BMCS technique has the lowest ROM in flexion and lateral bending. The BMCS-BMCS technique showed maximal cage stress in flexion and lateral bending, and the BPS-BPS technique in extension and rotation. Compared to the BPS-BPS and BMCS-BMCS technique, BPS-BMCS technique presented a lower risk of screw breakage and BMCS-BPS technique presented a lower risk of rod breakage.  The results of this study support that the use of the BPS-BMCS and BMCS-BPS techniques in TLIF surgery for offering the superior stability and a lower risk of cage subsidence and instrument-related complication.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 April 2023.
All research outputs
#15,867,217
of 23,572,509 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#2,538
of 4,145 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#137,619
of 254,144 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#26
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,572,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,145 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 254,144 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.