Publication:
Comparison of the rigid rod system with modular plate with the finite element analysis in short-segment posterior stabilization in the lower lumbar region

dc.contributor.coauthorYaldız, Can
dc.contributor.coauthorÖzkal, Birol
dc.contributor.coauthorGüvenç, Yahya
dc.contributor.coauthorErbulut, Deniz Ufuk
dc.contributor.departmentN/A
dc.contributor.kuauthorŞentürk, Salim
dc.contributor.kuauthorZafarparandeh, Iman
dc.contributor.kuauthorYaman, Onur
dc.contributor.kuauthorSolaroğlu, İhsan
dc.contributor.kuauthorÖzer, Ali Fahir
dc.contributor.kuprofileDoctor
dc.contributor.kuprofileDoctor
dc.contributor.kuprofileFaculty Member
dc.contributor.kuprofileFaculty Member
dc.contributor.schoolcollegeinstituteSchool of Medicine
dc.contributor.yokidN/A
dc.contributor.yokidN/A
dc.contributor.yokidN/A
dc.contributor.yokid102059
dc.contributor.yokid1022
dc.date.accessioned2024-11-09T12:15:08Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.description.abstractAIM: Many studies are available-in the literature on posterior spinal instrumentation, though the use of a rod and a plate is still controversial in the literature. In this study, a finite element analysis of the strength and superiority of modular rigid plate and rod systems, which are used in the lower lumbar region, in comparison with each other was used. MATERIAL and METHODS: A Ti6AI4V (Grade 5) titanium biocompatible alloy anterior plate was used for the lumbar spine fixation device, and a finite element analysis was conducted on the human lumbar spine model. In this study, an intact spine, a rigid system fixed with a rod, and modular plate systems were evaluated at flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation. RESULTS: They did not show statistically significant superiority over one another in terms of limitations in movement during the range of motion exercises and rigidity.CONCLUSION: The posterior rigid stabilization system and novel stabilization system do not have a significant superiority over one another. Equivalent results in the limitation of movement and rigidity allow for the use of these systems for short-segment posterior spinal instrumentation with the same indications.
dc.description.fulltextYES
dc.description.indexedbyWoS
dc.description.indexedbyScopus
dc.description.issue4
dc.description.openaccessYES
dc.description.publisherscopeNational
dc.description.sponsoredbyTubitakEuN/A
dc.description.sponsorshipN/A
dc.description.versionPublisher version
dc.description.volume27
dc.formatpdf
dc.identifier.doi10.5137/1019-5149.JTN.16203-15.1
dc.identifier.eissn1019-5149
dc.identifier.embargoNO
dc.identifier.filenameinventorynoIR01307
dc.identifier.linkhttps://doi.org/10.5137/1019-5149.JTN.16203-15.1
dc.identifier.quartileQ4
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85021379640
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14288/1326
dc.identifier.wos406170300016
dc.keywordsBiomedical device
dc.keywordsFinite element model
dc.keywordsJoint biomechanics
dc.keywordsMusculo-skeletal mechanics
dc.keywordsOrthopedic material
dc.languageEnglish
dc.publisherTurkish Neurosurgical Society
dc.relation.urihttp://cdm21054.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/IR/id/3009
dc.sourceTurkish Neurosurgery
dc.subjectMedicine
dc.subjectNeurosurgery
dc.titleComparison of the rigid rod system with modular plate with the finite element analysis in short-segment posterior stabilization in the lower lumbar region
dc.typeJournal Article
dspace.entity.typePublication
local.contributor.authoridN/A
local.contributor.authoridN/A
local.contributor.authoridN/A
local.contributor.authorid0000-0002-9472-1735
local.contributor.authorid0000-0001-7285-381X
local.contributor.kuauthorŞentürk, Salim
local.contributor.kuauthorZafarparandeh, Iman
local.contributor.kuauthorYaman, Onur
local.contributor.kuauthorSolaroğlu, İhsan
local.contributor.kuauthorÖzer, Ali Fahir

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
3009.pdf
Size:
386.25 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format