Abstract

Dynamic stabilization systems may be subject to anterior-posterior shear loading. However, there is no standard method established for testing a vertebrectomy model in anterior-posterior translation (as may be seen with dynamic spondylolisthesis). A new anterior-posterior shear fatigue test was devised to test one such dynamic stabilization system in anterior-posterior translation. Similar to ASTMF1717 assemblies, constructs were assembled so that screws were placed in ultra high molecular weight polyethylene blocks to attach to the test fixture. The test setup ensures that the entire shear load is transmitted by the implant system. Unlike ASTMF1717 assemblies, the blocks were rotated 180 deg from each other to facilitate loading in the test frame. This configuration is modified from an expected in vivo usage. However, the resultant load vectors are appropriately similar to the shear loads being simulated. The constructs include polymeric components and thus were tested at body temperature in a fluid bath. The blocks were moved ±5 mm with respect to each other. The constructs were cycled at 2 Hz for a minimum of 5 × 106 cycles. The constructs successfully survived 10 × 106 cycles of anterior-posterior shear displacement. Examination of the constructs demonstrated similarities between components tested via this new method and components retrieved from patients. Comparisons indicate that the shear fatigue test may stress the components as much or perhaps more than what was seen clinically.

References

1.
ASTM Standard F1717-11a
,
2011
,“
Standard Test Methods for Spinal Implant Constructs in a Vertebrectomy Model
,”
Annual Book of ASTM Standards
,
ASTM International
,
West Conshohocken, PA
.
2.
ASTM Standard F2624-07
,
2007
, “
Standard Test Method for Static, Dynamic, and Wear Assessment of Extra-Discal Spinal Motion Preserving Implants
,”
Annual Book of ASTM Standards
,
ASTM International
,
West Conshohocken, PA
.
3.
Guidance for Industry FDA Staff, Spinal System 510(k) s, Document issued on May 3, 2004 by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Rockville, MD,
2004
.
4.
Tanzi
,
M. C.
,
Mantovani
,
D.
,
Petrini
,
P.
,
Guidoin
,
R.
, and
Laroche
,
G.
, “
Chemical Stability of Polyether Urethanes Versus Polycarbonate Urethanes
,”
J. Biomed. Mater. Res
., Vol.
36
, No.
4
,
1997
, pp.
550
559
. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(19970915)36:4<>1.0.CO;2-U
5.
Panjabi
,
M. M.
,
Goel
,
V.
,
Oxland
,
T.
,
Takata
,
K.
,
Duranceau
,
J.
,
Krag
,
M.
, and
Price
,
M.
, “
Human Lumbar Vertebrae Quantitative Three-Dimensional Anatomy
,”
Spine
, Vol.
17
, No.
3
,
1992
, pp.
299
306
. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199203000-00010
6.
Cunningham
,
B. W.
,
Sefter
,
J. O.
,
Shono
,
Y.
, and
McAfee
,
P. C.
, “
Static and Cyclical Biomechanical Analysis of Pedicle Screw Spinal Constructs
,”
Spine
, Vol.
18
, No.
12
,
1993
, pp.
1677
1688
. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199309000-00017
7.
Trommsdorff
,
U.
,
Zurbrügg
,
D.
,
Abt
,
N. A.
,
Schneider
,
W.
, and
Rieder
,
V.
, “
Analysis of Retrieved Components of a Dynamic Stabilization System for the Spine
,” Poster, Spine Arthroplast Society Meeting,
2004
.
8.
Trommsdorff
,
U.
, and
Köttig
,
P.
, “
Analysis of Retrievals of the Dynesys Dynamic Stabilization System for the Spine
,” Poster, Eurospine,
2005
.
9.
Shen
,
M.
,
Zhang
,
K.
,
Köttig
,
P.
,
Welch
,
W. C.
, and
Dawson
,
J. M.
, “
In Vivo Biostability of Polymeric Spine Implants: Retrieval Analyses From a United States Investigational Device Exemption Study
,”
Eur. Spine J
., Vol.
20
, No.
11
,
2011
, pp.
1837
1849
. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-011-1812-8
This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this content.