↓ Skip to main content

The influence of spinal fusion length on proximal junction biomechanics: a parametric computational study

Overview of attention for article published in European Spine Journal, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 Mendeley
Title
The influence of spinal fusion length on proximal junction biomechanics: a parametric computational study
Published in
European Spine Journal, July 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00586-018-5700-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dominika Ignasiak, Tobias Peteler, Tamás F. Fekete, Daniel Haschtmann, Stephen J. Ferguson

Abstract

Proximal junctional kyphosis and failure are frequent complications in adult spinal deformity surgery with long fusion constructs. The aim of this study was to assess the biomechanics of the proximal segment for fusions of various lengths. A previously established musculoskeletal model of thoracolumbar spine was used to simulate full-range flexion task for fusions (modeled by introduction of rigid constraints) with lower instrumented vertebrae at L5 or S1 and upper instrumented vertebrae (UIV) at any level above, up to T2. Inverse dynamics simulations with force-dependent kinematics were performed for gradually increasing spinal flexion in order to predict global and segmental range of flexion, maximum passive moment, segmental compression and shear forces, which were compared to the uninstrumented case. For long fusions, with the UIV at T11 or higher, the model predicted an increase in segmental flexion (by 33-860%, or 1.6°-4.7°) and passive moment (by 39-1370%, or 13-31 Nm) at the proximal junction-generally increasing with fusion length. While the maximum shear force was 57-239% (135-283 N) higher for the proximal junction at the upper thorax (UIV at T6 or above), the compression forces were reduced by up to 44% (375 N). The length of the instrumentation has an important effect on the proximal segment biomechanics. Despite the limitations of the current model, musculoskeletal modeling appears to be a promising and versatile method to support planning of spinal instrumentation surgeries in the future. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 54 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 19%
Researcher 7 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 4%
Student > Bachelor 2 4%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 14 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 16 30%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 6%
Neuroscience 2 4%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 18 33%
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 23 July 2018.
All research outputs
#18,643,992
of 23,096,849 outputs
Outputs from European Spine Journal
#2,509
of 4,686 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#253,701
of 329,731 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Spine Journal
#47
of 91 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,096,849 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,686 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 329,731 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 91 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.