» Articles » PMID: 31234032

Biomechanical Analysis of Motion Following Sacroiliac Joint Fusion Using Lateral Sacroiliac Screws with or Without Lumbosacral Instrumented Fusion

Overview
Date 2019 Jun 25
PMID 31234032
Citations 5
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Sacroiliac joint hypermobility or aberrant mechanics may be a source of pain. The purpose of this study was to assess sacroiliac joint range of motion after simulated adjacent lumbosacral instrumented fusion, with or without sacroiliac joint fusion, with lateral sacroiliac screws.

Methods: In this in vitro biomechanical study, seven cadaveric specimens were tested on a six-degrees-of-freedom machine under load control. Left posterior sacroiliac joint ligaments were severed to maximize joint range of motion. Influence of lumbosacral instrumentation on sacroiliac joint motion, with or without fixation, was studied.

Findings: During flexion-extension in the setting of posterior sacroiliac joint injury and L5-S1 fixation, sacroiliac joint range of motion increased to 195% of intact. After fixation with lateral sacroiliac screws, average range of motion reduced to 144% of intact motion. Sacroiliac joint screws thus partially stabilized the joint and reduced motion. Use of 6 bilateral sacroiliac joint screws with L5-S1 screw and rod fixation in lateral bending and axial rotation yielded the greatest reduction in range of motion. Without lumbosacral fixation, baseline motion of the sacroiliac joint was reduced, and sacroiliac joint screw alone, using either 2, 3, or 6 screws, was able to restore motion at or below the level of an intact joint.

Interpretation: Sacroiliac joint ligament injury with existing lumbosacral fixation doubled sacroiliac joint range of motion, but thereafter, fixation with lateral sacroiliac screws decreased range of motion of the injured sacroiliac joint. Screw configuration played a minor role, but generally, 6 sacroiliac joint screws had the greatest motion reduction.

Citing Articles

Advancements in sacroiliac joint reduction for enhancing lumbosacral pain relief and achieving balanced gait: A literature review.

Zheng J, Duan C, Ma C Medicine (Baltimore). 2024; 103(50):e40350.

PMID: 39686504 PMC: 11651511. DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000040350.


An In Vitro Biomechanical Analysis of Contralateral Sacroiliac Joint Motion Following Unilateral Sacroiliac Stabilization with and without Lumbosacral Fixation.

Cho W, Wang W, Lim H, Bucklen B Asian Spine J. 2023; 17(1):185-193.

PMID: 36849242 PMC: 9977980. DOI: 10.31616/asj.2021.0492.


Comparative Analysis of Optoelectronic Accuracy in the Laboratory Setting Versus Clinical Operative Environment: A Systematic Review.

Cunningham B, Brooks D Global Spine J. 2022; 12(2_suppl):59S-74S.

PMID: 35393881 PMC: 8998481. DOI: 10.1177/21925682211035083.


Accuracy of Robotic-Assisted Spinal Surgery-Comparison to TJR Robotics, da Vinci Robotics, and Optoelectronic Laboratory Robotics.

Cunningham B, Brooks D, McAfee P Int J Spine Surg. 2021; 15(s2):S38-S55.

PMID: 34607917 PMC: 8532535. DOI: 10.14444/8139.


Finite element analysis of load transition on sacroiliac joint during bipedal walking.

Toyohara R, Kurosawa D, Hammer N, Werner M, Honda K, Sekiguchi Y Sci Rep. 2020; 10(1):13683.

PMID: 32792529 PMC: 7426964. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-70676-w.