Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 4, 2026
Mouse Lumbar Vertebra Uniaxial Compression Testing with Embedding of the Loading Surface
Published on: December 1, 2023
Biomechanical testing of a novel four-rod technique for lumbo-pelvic reconstruction
Brian P Kelly1, Francis H Shen, John S Schwab
1Department of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN 38163, USA. bkelly@utmem.edu
Study Design:
A biomechanical testing protocol was used to study different lumbo-pelvic fixation techniques in a human cadaveric lumbar spine model.
Objective:
To compare the in vitro biomechanics of a novel four-rod lumbo-pelvic reconstruction technique with and with out cross-links, to that of a conventional cross-linked two-rod technique.
Summary Of Background Data:
Numerous lumbo-pelvic reconstruction methods based on the Galveston two-rod technique have been proposed for cases involving total sacrectomy. Recently a technique that proposes novel use of 4 supporting longitudinal rods across the lumbo-pelvic junction has been reported. No comparative in vitro biomechanical testing has been previously done to evaluate these different reconstruction methods.
Methods:
Five spines were evaluated in flexion, extension, left-right lateral bending and left-right axial rotation in a human total sacrectomy model. The model was comprised of cadaveric lumbar spines (L1-L5) with custom fabricated polyethylene blocks used to simulate pelvic fixation. Three conditions were evaluated: Linked Four-Rod, Linked Two-Rod, and Four-Rod (no cross-links). Flexibility and motion data were compared using a one-way repeated measures analysis of variance and SNK tests.
Results:
The Linked Four-Rod and Four-Rod conditions significantly decreased flexibility and reduced L5-Pelvic motion over the Linked Two-Rod construct in flexion and extension. The Linked Four-Rod condition significantly decreased flexibility in left-right axial rotation compared with the Four-Rod and Linked Two-Rod conditions. No significant differences occurred in relative lateral movement between left and right pelvic polyethylene blocks.
Conclusion:
The four-rod technique improved fixation stability over the conventional linked two-rod technique in flexion and extension, and when cross-linked, in left-right axial rotation. The four-rod technique also significantly reduced L5-Pelvic junction movement in flexionand extension, which may have implications for bony fusion. The use of cross-links is recommended.
