Failure strength of lumbar spinous processes loaded in a tension band model: Laboratory investigation

S. Raymond Golish, Louie Fielding, Vijay Agarwal, Jenni Buckley, Todd F. Alamin

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Object. There has been increasing interest in spinous process tension band devices, as distinct from spinous process spacers and plates. The purpose of this study was to load spinous processes caudally at L-4 and cranially at L-5 parallel to the long axis of the spine in a biomechanical model of tension band loading. The goal was to provide normative data for the design of a spinous process tension band device after varying degrees of surgical decompression and across varying bone mineral densities (BMDs). Methods. Fresh-frozen L4-5 lumbar vertebrae pairs were divided into 3 surgical groups: intact, midline-sparing decompression (laminotomy and medial facetectomy), and midline decompression with foraminotomy (one-half of spinous process resected, laminotomy, and medial facetectomy). After decompression, specimens were disarticulated into isolated L-4 and L-5 vertebrae. Each vertebra was loaded to failure in a caudal (L-4) or cranial (L-5) direction parallel to the long axis of the spine via a 6-mm-wide strap looped around the spinous process. Failure strength and mode were recorded. Results. Seventeen L-4 and L-5 lumbar vertebrae were tested from 17 cadavers. There were 10 male (59%) and 7 female (41%) cadavers, with a mean age of 66.6 ± 16.5 years (range 41-100 years) and a mean BMD of 1 ± 0.23 g/ cm 2 (range 0.66-1.34 g/cm 2); the mean is expressed ± SD throughout. For data analysis, specimens were grouped into those with no or midline-sparing decompression (Group 1: 11 of 17) and those with midline decompression (Group 2: 6 of 17). At L-4, the mean failure strength for Group 1 was 453 ± 162 N, and for Group 2 it was 264 ± 99 N (p = 0.02; Cohen's d = 1.4). At L-5, the mean failure strength for Group 1 was 517 ± 190 N, and for Group 2 it was 269 ± 184 N (p = 0.02; Cohen's d = 1.3). There was no significant difference in failure strength between the intact and midline-sparing decompression groups at L-4 (p = 0.91) or L-5 (p = 0.41). Conclusions. Across specimens with a wide range of BMDs, midline-sparing decompression was not found to decrease the mean failure strength of the L-4 and L-5 spinous processes (453 and 517 N, respectively), whereas midline surgical decompression decreased the failure strength of these processes (264 and 269 N, respectively) in a biomechanical model of tension band loading relevant to the design of a tension band device.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)69-73
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Neurosurgery: Spine
Volume17
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1 2012
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Decompression
Spine
Bone Density
Surgical Decompression
Lumbar Vertebrae
Laminectomy
Cadaver
Equipment and Supplies
Foraminotomy

Keywords

  • Failure strength
  • Load
  • Lumbar vertebra
  • Spinous process
  • Tension band

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Neurology
  • Clinical Neurology

Cite this

Failure strength of lumbar spinous processes loaded in a tension band model : Laboratory investigation. / Golish, S. Raymond; Fielding, Louie; Agarwal, Vijay; Buckley, Jenni; Alamin, Todd F.

In: Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine, Vol. 17, No. 1, 01.07.2012, p. 69-73.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Golish, S. Raymond ; Fielding, Louie ; Agarwal, Vijay ; Buckley, Jenni ; Alamin, Todd F. / Failure strength of lumbar spinous processes loaded in a tension band model : Laboratory investigation. In: Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine. 2012 ; Vol. 17, No. 1. pp. 69-73.
@article{e18c93f1283443188dd5da0020b01d00,
title = "Failure strength of lumbar spinous processes loaded in a tension band model: Laboratory investigation",
abstract = "Object. There has been increasing interest in spinous process tension band devices, as distinct from spinous process spacers and plates. The purpose of this study was to load spinous processes caudally at L-4 and cranially at L-5 parallel to the long axis of the spine in a biomechanical model of tension band loading. The goal was to provide normative data for the design of a spinous process tension band device after varying degrees of surgical decompression and across varying bone mineral densities (BMDs). Methods. Fresh-frozen L4-5 lumbar vertebrae pairs were divided into 3 surgical groups: intact, midline-sparing decompression (laminotomy and medial facetectomy), and midline decompression with foraminotomy (one-half of spinous process resected, laminotomy, and medial facetectomy). After decompression, specimens were disarticulated into isolated L-4 and L-5 vertebrae. Each vertebra was loaded to failure in a caudal (L-4) or cranial (L-5) direction parallel to the long axis of the spine via a 6-mm-wide strap looped around the spinous process. Failure strength and mode were recorded. Results. Seventeen L-4 and L-5 lumbar vertebrae were tested from 17 cadavers. There were 10 male (59{\%}) and 7 female (41{\%}) cadavers, with a mean age of 66.6 ± 16.5 years (range 41-100 years) and a mean BMD of 1 ± 0.23 g/ cm 2 (range 0.66-1.34 g/cm 2); the mean is expressed ± SD throughout. For data analysis, specimens were grouped into those with no or midline-sparing decompression (Group 1: 11 of 17) and those with midline decompression (Group 2: 6 of 17). At L-4, the mean failure strength for Group 1 was 453 ± 162 N, and for Group 2 it was 264 ± 99 N (p = 0.02; Cohen's d = 1.4). At L-5, the mean failure strength for Group 1 was 517 ± 190 N, and for Group 2 it was 269 ± 184 N (p = 0.02; Cohen's d = 1.3). There was no significant difference in failure strength between the intact and midline-sparing decompression groups at L-4 (p = 0.91) or L-5 (p = 0.41). Conclusions. Across specimens with a wide range of BMDs, midline-sparing decompression was not found to decrease the mean failure strength of the L-4 and L-5 spinous processes (453 and 517 N, respectively), whereas midline surgical decompression decreased the failure strength of these processes (264 and 269 N, respectively) in a biomechanical model of tension band loading relevant to the design of a tension band device.",
keywords = "Failure strength, Load, Lumbar vertebra, Spinous process, Tension band",
author = "Golish, {S. Raymond} and Louie Fielding and Vijay Agarwal and Jenni Buckley and Alamin, {Todd F.}",
year = "2012",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.3171/2012.3.SPINE11392",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "17",
pages = "69--73",
journal = "Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine",
issn = "1547-5654",
publisher = "American Association of Neurological Surgeons",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Failure strength of lumbar spinous processes loaded in a tension band model

T2 - Laboratory investigation

AU - Golish, S. Raymond

AU - Fielding, Louie

AU - Agarwal, Vijay

AU - Buckley, Jenni

AU - Alamin, Todd F.

PY - 2012/7/1

Y1 - 2012/7/1

N2 - Object. There has been increasing interest in spinous process tension band devices, as distinct from spinous process spacers and plates. The purpose of this study was to load spinous processes caudally at L-4 and cranially at L-5 parallel to the long axis of the spine in a biomechanical model of tension band loading. The goal was to provide normative data for the design of a spinous process tension band device after varying degrees of surgical decompression and across varying bone mineral densities (BMDs). Methods. Fresh-frozen L4-5 lumbar vertebrae pairs were divided into 3 surgical groups: intact, midline-sparing decompression (laminotomy and medial facetectomy), and midline decompression with foraminotomy (one-half of spinous process resected, laminotomy, and medial facetectomy). After decompression, specimens were disarticulated into isolated L-4 and L-5 vertebrae. Each vertebra was loaded to failure in a caudal (L-4) or cranial (L-5) direction parallel to the long axis of the spine via a 6-mm-wide strap looped around the spinous process. Failure strength and mode were recorded. Results. Seventeen L-4 and L-5 lumbar vertebrae were tested from 17 cadavers. There were 10 male (59%) and 7 female (41%) cadavers, with a mean age of 66.6 ± 16.5 years (range 41-100 years) and a mean BMD of 1 ± 0.23 g/ cm 2 (range 0.66-1.34 g/cm 2); the mean is expressed ± SD throughout. For data analysis, specimens were grouped into those with no or midline-sparing decompression (Group 1: 11 of 17) and those with midline decompression (Group 2: 6 of 17). At L-4, the mean failure strength for Group 1 was 453 ± 162 N, and for Group 2 it was 264 ± 99 N (p = 0.02; Cohen's d = 1.4). At L-5, the mean failure strength for Group 1 was 517 ± 190 N, and for Group 2 it was 269 ± 184 N (p = 0.02; Cohen's d = 1.3). There was no significant difference in failure strength between the intact and midline-sparing decompression groups at L-4 (p = 0.91) or L-5 (p = 0.41). Conclusions. Across specimens with a wide range of BMDs, midline-sparing decompression was not found to decrease the mean failure strength of the L-4 and L-5 spinous processes (453 and 517 N, respectively), whereas midline surgical decompression decreased the failure strength of these processes (264 and 269 N, respectively) in a biomechanical model of tension band loading relevant to the design of a tension band device.

AB - Object. There has been increasing interest in spinous process tension band devices, as distinct from spinous process spacers and plates. The purpose of this study was to load spinous processes caudally at L-4 and cranially at L-5 parallel to the long axis of the spine in a biomechanical model of tension band loading. The goal was to provide normative data for the design of a spinous process tension band device after varying degrees of surgical decompression and across varying bone mineral densities (BMDs). Methods. Fresh-frozen L4-5 lumbar vertebrae pairs were divided into 3 surgical groups: intact, midline-sparing decompression (laminotomy and medial facetectomy), and midline decompression with foraminotomy (one-half of spinous process resected, laminotomy, and medial facetectomy). After decompression, specimens were disarticulated into isolated L-4 and L-5 vertebrae. Each vertebra was loaded to failure in a caudal (L-4) or cranial (L-5) direction parallel to the long axis of the spine via a 6-mm-wide strap looped around the spinous process. Failure strength and mode were recorded. Results. Seventeen L-4 and L-5 lumbar vertebrae were tested from 17 cadavers. There were 10 male (59%) and 7 female (41%) cadavers, with a mean age of 66.6 ± 16.5 years (range 41-100 years) and a mean BMD of 1 ± 0.23 g/ cm 2 (range 0.66-1.34 g/cm 2); the mean is expressed ± SD throughout. For data analysis, specimens were grouped into those with no or midline-sparing decompression (Group 1: 11 of 17) and those with midline decompression (Group 2: 6 of 17). At L-4, the mean failure strength for Group 1 was 453 ± 162 N, and for Group 2 it was 264 ± 99 N (p = 0.02; Cohen's d = 1.4). At L-5, the mean failure strength for Group 1 was 517 ± 190 N, and for Group 2 it was 269 ± 184 N (p = 0.02; Cohen's d = 1.3). There was no significant difference in failure strength between the intact and midline-sparing decompression groups at L-4 (p = 0.91) or L-5 (p = 0.41). Conclusions. Across specimens with a wide range of BMDs, midline-sparing decompression was not found to decrease the mean failure strength of the L-4 and L-5 spinous processes (453 and 517 N, respectively), whereas midline surgical decompression decreased the failure strength of these processes (264 and 269 N, respectively) in a biomechanical model of tension band loading relevant to the design of a tension band device.

KW - Failure strength

KW - Load

KW - Lumbar vertebra

KW - Spinous process

KW - Tension band

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84863458188&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84863458188&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3171/2012.3.SPINE11392

DO - 10.3171/2012.3.SPINE11392

M3 - Article

C2 - 22559276

AN - SCOPUS:84863458188

VL - 17

SP - 69

EP - 73

JO - Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine

JF - Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine

SN - 1547-5654

IS - 1

ER -