Objective: Screw loosening is a widely reported issue after spinal screw fixation and triggers several complications after lumbar interbody fusion. Osteoporosis is an essential risk factor for screw loosening. Hounsfield units (HU) value is a credible indicator during bone mineral density (BMD) evaluation. As compared with the general evaluation of BMD, we hypothesized that specific measurements of HU at the precise location of the future screw insertion may be a better predictor of screw loosening. Methods: Clinical data of 56 patients treated by oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) of the L4-L5 segments with an anterior lateral single rod (ALSR) screw fixation were reviewed in this study. Vertebral bodies with ≥ 1 mm width radiolucent zones around the screw were defined as screw loosening. HU in the insertional screw positions, the central transverse plane, and the average values of three and four planes were measured. Regression analyses identified independent risk factors for screw loosening separately. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was computed to evaluate predictive performance. Results: The local HU values were significantly lower in the loosening group, regardless of the selected measuring methods. The AUC of screw loosening prediction was higher in the insertional screw positions’ HU than other frequently used methods. Conclusions: The HU value measured in the insertional screw position is a better predictor of ALSR screw loosening than other methods. The risk of screw loosening should be reduced by optimizing the trajectory of the screw based on the measurement of HU in preoperative CT. Key Points: • Osteoporosis is an essential risk factor for screw loosening, and Hounsfield units (HU) are a credible predictor during bone mineral density (BMD) evaluation. • The HU value measured in the insertional screw position is a better predictor of screw loosening than other frequently used HU measurement methods. • The risk of screw loosening might potentially be reduced by optimizing the trajectory of the screw based on the measurement of HU in preoperative CT.

The mismatch between bony endplates (BEPs) and grafted bone (GB) triggers several complications biomechanically. However, no published study has identified whether this factor increases the risk of screw loosening by deteriorating the local stress levels. This study aimed to illustrate the biomechanical effects of the mismatch between BEP and GB and the related risk of screw loosening. In this study, radiographic and demographic data of 56 patients treated by single segment oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) with anterior lateral single rod (ALSR) fixation were collected retrospectively, and the match sufficiency between BEP and GB was measured and presented as the grafted bony occupancy rate (GBOR). Data in patients with and without screw loosening were compared; regression analyses identified independent risk factors. OLIF with different GBORs was simulated in a previously constructed and validated lumbosacral model, and biomechanical indicators related to screw loosening were computed in surgical models. The radiographic review and numerical simulations showed that the coronal plane’s GBOR was significantly lower in screw loosening patients both in the cranial and caudal vertebral bodies; the decrease in the coronal plane’s GBOR has been proven to be an independent risk factor for screw loosening. In addition, numerical mechanical simulations showed that the poor match between BEP and GB will lead to stress concentration on both screws and bone-screw interfaces. Therefore, we can conclude that the mismatch between the BEP and GB will increase the risk of screw loosening by deteriorating local stress levels, and the increase in the GBOR by modifying the OLIF cage’s design may be an effective method to optimize the patient’s prognosis.

Objectives: The three‐dimensional printing titanium (3DPT) cage with excellent biomechanical properties and osseointegration capabilities has been initially used in spinal fusion, while the polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage, a bioinert material device, has been a widely used for decades with relatively excellent clinical outcomes. This study was performed to investigate the early radiographic and clinical outcomes of 3DPT cage versus PEEK cage in patients undergoing anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF).Methods: This prospective controlled trial, from December 2019 to June 2022, included patients undergoing ACDF and TLIF with 3DPT cages and compared them to patients using PEEK cages for treating spinal degenerative disorders. The outcome measures included radiographic parameters (intervertebral height [IH], subsidence, fusion status, and bone‐cage interface contact) and clinical outcomes (Japanese Orthopaedic Association [JOA], Neck Disability Index [NDI], Oswestry Disability Index [ODI], Short Form 12‐Item Survey [SF‐12], Visual Analog Scale [VAS], and Odom's criteria). Student's independent samples t test and Pearson's chi‐square test were used to compare the outcome measures between the two groups before surgery and at 1 week, 3 and 6 months after surgery.Results: For the patients undergoing ACDF, the 3DPT (18 patients/[26 segments]) and PEEK groups (18 patients/[26 segments]) had similar fusion rates at 3 months and 6 months follow‐up (3 months: 96.2% vs. 83.3%, p = 0.182; 6 months: 100% vs. 91.7%, p = 0.225). The subsidence in the 3DPT group was significantly lower than that in the PEEK group (3 months: 0.4 ± 0.2 mm vs. 0.9 ± 0.7 mm p = 0.004; 6 months: 0.7 ± 0.3 mm vs. 1.5 ± 0.8 mm, p < 0.001). 3DPT and PEEK cage all achieved sufficient contact with the cervical endplates. For the patients undergoing TLIF, the 3DPT (20 patients/[26 segments]) and PEEK groups (20 patients/[24 segments]) had no statistical difference in fusion rate (3 months: 84.6% vs. 58.3%, p = 0.059; 6 months: 92.3% vs. 75%, p = 0.132). The subsidence was lower than that in the PEEK group without significantly difference (3 months: 0.9 ± 0.7 mm vs.1.2 ± 0.9 mm p = 0.136; 6 months: 1.6 ± 1.0 mm vs. 2.0 ± 1.0 mm, p = 0.200). At the 3‐month follow‐up, the bone‐cage interface contact of the 3DPT cage was significantly better than that of the PEEK cage (poor contact: 15.4% vs. 75%, p < 0.001). The values of UAR were higher in the 3DPT group than in the PEEK group during the follow‐up in cervical and lumbar fusion, there were more statistical differences in lumbar fusion. There were no significant differences in the clinical assessment between 3DPT or PEEK cage in spinal fusion.Conclusion: The 3DPT cage and PEEK cage can achieve excellent clinical outcomes in cervical and lumbar fusion. The 3DPT cage has advantage in fusion quality, subsidence severity, and bone‐cage interface contact than PEEK cage.

Backgrounds: Finite element analysis (FEA) is an important tool during the spinal biomechanical study. Irregular surfaces in FEA models directly reconstructed based on imaging data may increase the computational burden and decrease the computational credibility. Definitions of the relative nucleus position and its cross-sectional area ratio do not conform to a uniform standard in FEA. Methods: To increase the accuracy and efficiency of FEA, nucleus position and cross-sectional area ratio were measured from imaging data. A FEA model with smoothened surfaces was constructed using measured values. Nucleus position was calibrated by estimating the differences in the range of motion (RoM) between the FEA model and that of an in-vitro study. Then, the differences were re-estimated by comparing the RoM, the intradiscal pressure, the facet contact force, and the disc compression to validate the measured and calibrated indicators. The computational time in different models was also recorded to evaluate the efficiency. Results: Computational results indicated that 99% of accuracy was attained when measured and calibrated indicators were set in the FEA model, with a model validation of greater than 90% attained under almost all of the loading conditions. Computational time decreased by around 70% in the fitted model with smoothened surfaces compared with that of the reconstructed model. Conclusions: The computational accuracy and efficiency of in-silico study can be improved in the lumbar FEA model constructed using smoothened surfaces with measured and calibrated relative nucleus position and its cross-sectional area ratio.

Background: Facetectomy, an important procedure in the in–out and out–in techniques of transforaminal endoscopic lumbar discectomy (TELD), is related to the deterioration of the postoperative biomechanical environment and poor prognosis. Facetectomy may be avoided in TELD with large annuloplasty, but iatrogenic injury of the annulus and a high grade of nucleotomy have been reported as risk factors influencing poor prognosis. These risk factors may be alleviated in TELD with limited foraminoplasty, and the grade of facetectomy in this surgery can be reduced by using an endoscopic dynamic drill. Methods: An intact lumbo-sacral finite element (FE) model and the corresponding model with adjacent segment degeneration were constructed and validated to evaluate the risk of biomechanical deterioration and related postoperative complications of TELD with large annuloplasty and TELD with limited foraminoplasty. Changes in various biomechanical indicators were then computed to evaluate the risk of postoperative complications in the surgical segment. Results: Compared with the intact FE models, the model of TELD with limited foraminoplasty demonstrated slight biomechanical deterioration, whereas the model of TELD with large annuloplasty revealed obvious biomechanical deterioration. Degenerative changes in adjacent segments magnified, rather than altered, the overall trends of biomechanical change. Conclusions: TELD with limited foraminoplasty presents potential biomechanical advantages over TELD with large annuloplasty. Iatrogenic injury of the annulus and a high grade of nucleotomy are risk factors for postoperative biomechanical deterioration and complications of the surgical segment.