↓ Skip to main content

Biomechanical evaluation of a new pedicle screw-based posterior dynamic stabilization device (Awesome Rod System) - a finite element analysis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 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
Biomechanical evaluation of a new pedicle screw-based posterior dynamic stabilization device (Awesome Rod System) - a finite element analysis
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12891-015-0538-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chen-Sheng Chen, Chang-Hung Huang, Shih-Liang Shih

Abstract

Pedicle-screw-based posterior dynamic stabilization devices are designed to alleviate the rate of accelerated degeneration of the vertebral level adjacent to the level of spinal fusion. A new pedicle- screw-based posterior dynamic stabilization device- the Awesome Dynamic Rod System was designed with curve cuts on the rods to provide flexibility. The current study was conducted to evaluate the biomechanical properties of this new device. Finite element models were developed for the intact spine (INT), the Awesome Dynamic Rod Implanted at L4-L5 (AWE), a traditional rigid rod system implanted at L4-L5 along with an interbody cage (FUS), and the Awesome Dynamic Rod System implanted at L4-L5 along with an interbody cage as an adjunct to fusion procedures and extension of dynamic fixation to L3-L4 (AWEFUS). The models were subjected to axial loads and pure moments and evaluated by a hybrid method on range of motion (ROM)s, disc stresses, pedicle screws stresses, and facet joint contact forces. FUS sustained the lowest L4-L5 ROM decrement in flexion and torsion. AWE demonstrated the lowest adjacent level ROM increment in all moments except for extension at L3-L4, and AWEFUS showed the greatest ROM increment at L2-L3. AWE demonstrated lowest adjacent segment disc stress in flexion, lateral bending and torsion at L3-L4. AWEFUS showed the highest disc stress increment in flexion, extension, and lateral bending, and the lowest disc stress decrement in torsion at L2-L3. AWE sustained greater adjacent facet joint contact forces than did FUS in extension and lateral bending at L3-L4, and AWEFUS demonstrated the greatest contact forces concentrating at L2-L3. The results demonstrate that the Awesome Dynamic Rod System preserved more bridged segment motion than did the traditional rigid rod fixation system except in extension. However, the Awesome Dynamic Rod System bore a greater facet joint contact force in extension. The Awesome Dynamic Rod System did protect the adjacent level of fusion segments, but led to much greater ROM, disc stresses, and facet joint contact forces increasing at the adjacent level of instrumented segments.

Twitter Demographics

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

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 42 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 24%
Student > Master 7 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 12%
Student > Bachelor 5 12%
Other 4 10%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 5 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 12 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Design 2 5%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 8 19%

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 12 April 2015.
All research outputs
#3,325,951
of 4,986,430 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#1,384
of 1,677 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#103,325
of 150,702 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#46
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,986,430 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,677 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 150,702 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.