[Primary stability of 2 PLIF (posterior lumbar interbody fusion)--a biomechanical in vitro comparison]
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 19, 2026

Lateral-PLIF for Lumbar Spinal Arthrodesis: A Detailed Step-By-Step Surgical Technique
Published on: January 23, 2026
T Pitzen1, W Caspar, D Matthis
1Neurochirurgische Klinik, Universitätsklinik des Saarlandes, Homburg/Saar.
Objective:
The purpose of this biomechanical in-vitro-study was to compare two different PLIF-techniques with two types of implants on human lumbar spine: PLIF with threaded cages, (Bagby and Kuslich, Spinetech, Minneapolis, USA) and PLIF with the Moss-Miami-implants, (DePuy International Limited, Leeds, Great Britain).
Methods:
Six cadaveric human lumbar spine segments L2-5 were explanted, frozen at -20 degrees C and thawed before preparation. They were cut in two parts by discectomie and arthrotomie L3/4, so six specimen L2/3 and six specimen L4/5 were obtained and used in a crossover-trial. Analysis included testing in a tension-torsion-machine under axial compression with 600 N, rotation (left-right) with 25 Nm and shearing forces with 250 N without preload. This was first done in the intact and then in the fused specimen.
Results:
Stiffness before treatment was comparable in both groups irrespective of location. Posttreatment stiffness was higher with MOSS-MIAMI-implants as compared to PLIF with BAK-cages. Average relative superiority (and 95%-confidence intervall) were 1.98 (1.01-3.69) for compression, 2.30 (0.85-6.24) for rotation and 1.73 (0.78-3.84) for shearing. Statistical comparison of log posttreatment stiffness was significant for compression but not for rotation and shearing (2-sided independent crossover t-test).
Conclusion:
This biomechanical in-vitro-study demonstrates the higher initial stability of PLIF with titanium surgical mesh and posterior instrumentation when compared to PLIF with threaded cages alone.