File Download
 
Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
 
Supplementary

Article: Biomechanical effects of transverse partial sacrectomy on the sacroiliac joints: An in vitro human cadaveric investigation of the borderline of sacroiliac joint instability
  • Basic View
  • Metadata View
  • XML View
TitleBiomechanical effects of transverse partial sacrectomy on the sacroiliac joints: An in vitro human cadaveric investigation of the borderline of sacroiliac joint instability
 
AuthorsYu, B2
Zheng, Z2
Zhuang, X2
Chen, H2
Xie, D2
Luk, KDK1
Lu, WW1
 
KeywordsBiomechanics
Pelvis
Reconstruction
Sacral tumor
Sacrectomy
 
Issue Date2009
 
PublisherLippincott, Williams & Wilkins. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.spinejournal.com
 
CitationSpine, 2009, v. 34 n. 13, p. 1370-1375 [How to Cite?]
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181a3d440
 
AbstractSTUDY DESIGN. In vitro laboratory study. OBJECTIVE. To measure the effects of transverse partial sacrectomies on the compressive and torsional stiffness of the sacroiliac joints. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA. Surgical treatment for sacral tumor of different location and nature includes partial or complete sacrectomy. Though the biomechanical investigations about the local destructive force of residual sacrum after partial sacrectomy have been reported, biomechanical properties of the residual sacroiliac joints after different transverse partial sacrectomies remain unknown. METHODS. Seven fresh human cadaveric L5-pelves with normal bone mineral density were used in this study. Each specimen was tested in intact condition first, followed by a series of segmental transverse partial sacrectomies: under S2 partial sacrectomy (U-S2); U-1/2S2; U-S1; U-1/2S1; and right side sacroiliac joint resection (one-side). A material testing machine was used to apply 800 N compression and 7 Nm torsion loads through the L5/S1 joint. The resected dimensional area of sacroiliac joints and structural stiffness of the residual sacroiliac joints were analyzed. RESULTS. Average percentages of the resected area of sacroiliac joints were 8.4% in U-S2, 15.1% in U-1/2S2, 24.8% in U-S1, and 72.3% in U-1/2S1, respectively. In compression U-S2 ∼ one-side preserved 98.7%, 97.1%, 94.4%, 82.9%, and 55.2% of the initial stiffness of the sacroiliac joint, respectively. No significant differences were detected among intact, U-S2, U-1/2S2, and U-S1 (P > 0.05). However, compressive stiffness of U-1/2S1 and one-side was markedly less than that of intact, U-S2, and U-1/2S2 (P < 0.05). In Torsion U-S2 ∼ one-side preserved 90.7%, 88.5%, 81.9%, 71.9%, and 44.5% of the initial sacroiliac joint stiffness, respectively. No significant differences were demonstrated among intact, U-S2, and U-1/2S2 (P > 0.05); However, U-S1, U-1/2S1 and one-side exhibited significantly less torsional stiffness than intact and U-S2 (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION. In surgical treatment of distal sacral tumor, transverse partial sacrectomy involving S1 could result in rotational instability, and the resection level beyond 1/2S1 further led to compressive instability. When the sacrectomy was at or above the S1/2 level, local reconstruction should be considered. © 2009 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.
 
ISSN0362-2436
2012 Impact Factor: 2.159
2012 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.447
 
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181a3d440
 
ISI Accession Number IDWOS:000266573900004
Funding AgencyGrant Number
HKRGC715306/06E
Funding Information:

Partial support from HKRGC (715306/06E).

 
ReferencesReferences in Scopus
 
DC FieldValue
dc.contributor.authorYu, B
 
dc.contributor.authorZheng, Z
 
dc.contributor.authorZhuang, X
 
dc.contributor.authorChen, H
 
dc.contributor.authorXie, D
 
dc.contributor.authorLuk, KDK
 
dc.contributor.authorLu, WW
 
dc.date.accessioned2010-05-31T03:51:08Z
 
dc.date.available2010-05-31T03:51:08Z
 
dc.date.issued2009
 
dc.description.abstractSTUDY DESIGN. In vitro laboratory study. OBJECTIVE. To measure the effects of transverse partial sacrectomies on the compressive and torsional stiffness of the sacroiliac joints. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA. Surgical treatment for sacral tumor of different location and nature includes partial or complete sacrectomy. Though the biomechanical investigations about the local destructive force of residual sacrum after partial sacrectomy have been reported, biomechanical properties of the residual sacroiliac joints after different transverse partial sacrectomies remain unknown. METHODS. Seven fresh human cadaveric L5-pelves with normal bone mineral density were used in this study. Each specimen was tested in intact condition first, followed by a series of segmental transverse partial sacrectomies: under S2 partial sacrectomy (U-S2); U-1/2S2; U-S1; U-1/2S1; and right side sacroiliac joint resection (one-side). A material testing machine was used to apply 800 N compression and 7 Nm torsion loads through the L5/S1 joint. The resected dimensional area of sacroiliac joints and structural stiffness of the residual sacroiliac joints were analyzed. RESULTS. Average percentages of the resected area of sacroiliac joints were 8.4% in U-S2, 15.1% in U-1/2S2, 24.8% in U-S1, and 72.3% in U-1/2S1, respectively. In compression U-S2 ∼ one-side preserved 98.7%, 97.1%, 94.4%, 82.9%, and 55.2% of the initial stiffness of the sacroiliac joint, respectively. No significant differences were detected among intact, U-S2, U-1/2S2, and U-S1 (P > 0.05). However, compressive stiffness of U-1/2S1 and one-side was markedly less than that of intact, U-S2, and U-1/2S2 (P < 0.05). In Torsion U-S2 ∼ one-side preserved 90.7%, 88.5%, 81.9%, 71.9%, and 44.5% of the initial sacroiliac joint stiffness, respectively. No significant differences were demonstrated among intact, U-S2, and U-1/2S2 (P > 0.05); However, U-S1, U-1/2S1 and one-side exhibited significantly less torsional stiffness than intact and U-S2 (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION. In surgical treatment of distal sacral tumor, transverse partial sacrectomy involving S1 could result in rotational instability, and the resection level beyond 1/2S1 further led to compressive instability. When the sacrectomy was at or above the S1/2 level, local reconstruction should be considered. © 2009 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.
 
dc.description.natureLink_to_subscribed_fulltext
 
dc.identifier.citationSpine, 2009, v. 34 n. 13, p. 1370-1375 [How to Cite?]
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181a3d440
 
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181a3d440
 
dc.identifier.epage1375
 
dc.identifier.hkuros166591
 
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000266573900004
Funding AgencyGrant Number
HKRGC715306/06E
Funding Information:

Partial support from HKRGC (715306/06E).

 
dc.identifier.issn0362-2436
2012 Impact Factor: 2.159
2012 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.447
 
dc.identifier.issue13
 
dc.identifier.openurl
 
dc.identifier.pmid19478657
 
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-67749089378
 
dc.identifier.spage1370
 
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/59484
 
dc.identifier.volume34
 
dc.languageeng
 
dc.publisherLippincott, Williams & Wilkins. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.spinejournal.com
 
dc.publisher.placeUnited States
 
dc.relation.ispartofSpine
 
dc.relation.referencesReferences in Scopus
 
dc.subjectBiomechanics
 
dc.subjectPelvis
 
dc.subjectReconstruction
 
dc.subjectSacral tumor
 
dc.subjectSacrectomy
 
dc.titleBiomechanical effects of transverse partial sacrectomy on the sacroiliac joints: An in vitro human cadaveric investigation of the borderline of sacroiliac joint instability
 
dc.typeArticle
 
<?xml encoding="utf-8" version="1.0"?>
<item><contributor.author>Yu, B</contributor.author>
<contributor.author>Zheng, Z</contributor.author>
<contributor.author>Zhuang, X</contributor.author>
<contributor.author>Chen, H</contributor.author>
<contributor.author>Xie, D</contributor.author>
<contributor.author>Luk, KDK</contributor.author>
<contributor.author>Lu, WW</contributor.author>
<date.accessioned>2010-05-31T03:51:08Z</date.accessioned>
<date.available>2010-05-31T03:51:08Z</date.available>
<date.issued>2009</date.issued>
<identifier.citation>Spine, 2009, v. 34 n. 13, p. 1370-1375</identifier.citation>
<identifier.issn>0362-2436</identifier.issn>
<identifier.uri>http://hdl.handle.net/10722/59484</identifier.uri>
<description.abstract>STUDY DESIGN. In vitro laboratory study. OBJECTIVE. To measure the effects of transverse partial sacrectomies on the compressive and torsional stiffness of the sacroiliac joints. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA. Surgical treatment for sacral tumor of different location and nature includes partial or complete sacrectomy. Though the biomechanical investigations about the local destructive force of residual sacrum after partial sacrectomy have been reported, biomechanical properties of the residual sacroiliac joints after different transverse partial sacrectomies remain unknown. METHODS. Seven fresh human cadaveric L5-pelves with normal bone mineral density were used in this study. Each specimen was tested in intact condition first, followed by a series of segmental transverse partial sacrectomies: under S2 partial sacrectomy (U-S2); U-1/2S2; U-S1; U-1/2S1; and right side sacroiliac joint resection (one-side). A material testing machine was used to apply 800 N compression and 7 Nm torsion loads through the L5/S1 joint. The resected dimensional area of sacroiliac joints and structural stiffness of the residual sacroiliac joints were analyzed. RESULTS. Average percentages of the resected area of sacroiliac joints were 8.4% in U-S2, 15.1% in U-1/2S2, 24.8% in U-S1, and 72.3% in U-1/2S1, respectively. In compression U-S2 &#8764; one-side preserved 98.7%, 97.1%, 94.4%, 82.9%, and 55.2% of the initial stiffness of the sacroiliac joint, respectively. No significant differences were detected among intact, U-S2, U-1/2S2, and U-S1 (P &gt; 0.05). However, compressive stiffness of U-1/2S1 and one-side was markedly less than that of intact, U-S2, and U-1/2S2 (P &lt; 0.05). In Torsion U-S2 &#8764; one-side preserved 90.7%, 88.5%, 81.9%, 71.9%, and 44.5% of the initial sacroiliac joint stiffness, respectively. No significant differences were demonstrated among intact, U-S2, and U-1/2S2 (P &gt; 0.05); However, U-S1, U-1/2S1 and one-side exhibited significantly less torsional stiffness than intact and U-S2 (P &lt; 0.05). CONCLUSION. In surgical treatment of distal sacral tumor, transverse partial sacrectomy involving S1 could result in rotational instability, and the resection level beyond 1/2S1 further led to compressive instability. When the sacrectomy was at or above the S1/2 level, local reconstruction should be considered. &#169; 2009 Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins, Inc.</description.abstract>
<language>eng</language>
<publisher>Lippincott, Williams &amp; Wilkins. The Journal&apos;s web site is located at http://www.spinejournal.com</publisher>
<relation.ispartof>Spine</relation.ispartof>
<subject>Biomechanics</subject>
<subject>Pelvis</subject>
<subject>Reconstruction</subject>
<subject>Sacral tumor</subject>
<subject>Sacrectomy</subject>
<title>Biomechanical effects of transverse partial sacrectomy on the sacroiliac joints: An in vitro human cadaveric investigation of the borderline of sacroiliac joint instability</title>
<type>Article</type>
<identifier.openurl>http://library.hku.hk:4550/resserv?sid=HKU:IR&amp;issn=0887-9869&amp;volume=34 &amp;issue=13&amp;spage=1370&amp;epage=1375&amp;date=2009&amp;atitle=Biomechanical+effects+of+transverse+partial+sacrectomy+on+the+sacroiliac+joints+an+in+vitro+human+cadaveric+investigation+of+the+borderline+of+sacroiliac+joint+instability.</identifier.openurl>
<description.nature>Link_to_subscribed_fulltext</description.nature>
<identifier.doi>10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181a3d440</identifier.doi>
<identifier.pmid>19478657</identifier.pmid>
<identifier.scopus>eid_2-s2.0-67749089378</identifier.scopus>
<identifier.hkuros>166591</identifier.hkuros>
<relation.references>http://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-67749089378&amp;selection=ref&amp;src=s&amp;origin=recordpage</relation.references>
<identifier.volume>34</identifier.volume>
<identifier.issue>13</identifier.issue>
<identifier.spage>1370</identifier.spage>
<identifier.epage>1375</identifier.epage>
<identifier.isi>WOS:000266573900004</identifier.isi>
<publisher.place>United States</publisher.place>
</item>
Author Affiliations
  1. The University of Hong Kong
  2. Sun Yat-Sen University