Finite element analysis evaluates stiffness outcomes in lumbar interbody fusion, suggesting improved rehabilitation strategies.
Lumbar interbody fusion outcomes depend on the spatial distribution and maturity of the fusion mass relative to direction-specific loading. Using finite element analysis of a pedicle screw-rod instrumented L4-L5 construct with a central PEEK cage, we quantified how localized fusion in anterior (A), posterior (P), and left/right lateral (L/R) zones affect stiffness under flexion-extension, lateral bending, and torsion. 11 fusion configurations (one 4-zone; four 3-zone; and six 2-zone) were tested using 20 Latin Hypercube-sampled fusion moduli from a trabecular bone distribution. Stiffness ratios were benchmarked to full fusion using 90% equivalence bounds [0.90, 1.10], two one-sided tests (p < 0.05), and sub-equivalence probabilities. 3-zone patterns APL, APR, and ALR were equivalent in flexion-extension, while PLR was borderline. Lateral bending required bilateral lateral fusion (LR, ALR, PLR) to match full-fusion performance, whereas torsional equivalence demanded circumferential coverage with both lateral zones plus either A or P (ALR/PLR). Apart from lateral bending, 2-zone constructs were uniformly sub-equivalent, though higher-quality anterior-involved pairs approached sagittal equivalence. Overall, these findings support a functional stiffness-based definition of fusion that advocates deliberate circumferential grafting, especially robust bilateral lateral fusion, and inform graded load-specific rehabilitation that prioritizes anterior-posterior activities before side-bending and rotation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lee et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: