Biomechanical Effects of Zero‐P Height on Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Finite Element Study

ABSTRACT Objective The principle of selecting a Zero‐P implant of an appropriate height remains a topic of debate, particularly when similarly sized implants seem to appropriately fit the intervertebral space. Thus, this study compared the biomechanical performance of smaller and larger Zero‐P impla...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Cheng‐yi Huang, Jun‐bo He, Xing‐Jin Wang, Ting‐kui Wu, Bei‐yu Wang, Jin Xu, Hao Liu
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2025-04-01
Series:Orthopaedic Surgery
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1111/os.14374
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850274968528486400
author Cheng‐yi Huang
Jun‐bo He
Xing‐Jin Wang
Ting‐kui Wu
Bei‐yu Wang
Jin Xu
Hao Liu
author_facet Cheng‐yi Huang
Jun‐bo He
Xing‐Jin Wang
Ting‐kui Wu
Bei‐yu Wang
Jin Xu
Hao Liu
author_sort Cheng‐yi Huang
collection DOAJ
description ABSTRACT Objective The principle of selecting a Zero‐P implant of an appropriate height remains a topic of debate, particularly when similarly sized implants seem to appropriately fit the intervertebral space. Thus, this study compared the biomechanical performance of smaller and larger Zero‐P implants within an appropriate height range with that of oversized Zero‐P implants for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). Methods A three‐dimensional finite element (FE) model of the C2–C7 cervical spine was constructed and validated. The implants were categorized as smaller (6 mm), larger (7 mm), and oversized (8 mm) according to the average intervertebral height and implant specifications. Thus, the following four FE models were constructed: the intact cervical spine model (M1), the 6 mm model (M2), the 7 mm model (M3), and the 8 mm (M4) Zero‐P implant C5/6 segment ACDF surgical model. Then, a pure moment of 1.0 N·m combined with a follower load of 75 N was applied at C2 to simulate flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation. Results The results indicated that the maximum stress on the vertebral body, intervertebral disc, and facet joints under self‐weight increased with increasing Zero‐P height. Under six different loading conditions, the maximum stress on the vertebral body in the surgical segment of the M4 model was generally greater than that in the M2 and M3 models. Following an increase in the height of the implant from 6 mm to 8 mm, the maximum stress increased, and the intervertebral disc stress of both segments reached its peak in the M4 model. In the M4 model, the implant experienced the highest stress, whereas the M2 model exhibited the lowest stress on the implant under both self‐weight and loading conditions. Furthermore, the stress on the posterior facet joints of the surgical segment increased with increasing Zero‐P height. The range of maximum stress on the posterior facet joints for the M3 model was situated between that of the M2 and M4 models. Conclusion In summary, after determining the appropriate height range for the implant in accordance with the mean height of the intervertebral space, opting for a larger size appears to be more advantageous. This approach helps maintain the height of the intervertebral space and provides greater stress, promoting a tighter fit between the upper and lower endplates and the Zero‐P. This tighter fit is crucial for maintaining spinal stability, enhancing the early bony fusion rate, and potentially leading to better postoperative outcomes.
format Article
id doaj-art-3117d7a80cfc4f12ba55578e856d62ab
institution OA Journals
issn 1757-7853
1757-7861
language English
publishDate 2025-04-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series Orthopaedic Surgery
spelling doaj-art-3117d7a80cfc4f12ba55578e856d62ab2025-08-20T01:50:59ZengWileyOrthopaedic Surgery1757-78531757-78612025-04-011741172118010.1111/os.14374Biomechanical Effects of Zero‐P Height on Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Finite Element StudyCheng‐yi Huang0Jun‐bo He1Xing‐Jin Wang2Ting‐kui Wu3Bei‐yu Wang4Jin Xu5Hao Liu6Department of Orthopedics, Orthopedic Research Institute, West China Hospital Sichuan University Chengdu ChinaDepartment of Orthopedics, Orthopedic Research Institute, West China Hospital Sichuan University Chengdu ChinaDepartment of Orthopedics, Orthopedic Research Institute, West China Hospital Sichuan University Chengdu ChinaDepartment of Orthopedics, Orthopedic Research Institute, West China Hospital Sichuan University Chengdu ChinaDepartment of Orthopedics, Orthopedic Research Institute, West China Hospital Sichuan University Chengdu ChinaDepartment of Pain Treatment Tianjin Hospital Tianjin ChinaDepartment of Orthopedics, Orthopedic Research Institute, West China Hospital Sichuan University Chengdu ChinaABSTRACT Objective The principle of selecting a Zero‐P implant of an appropriate height remains a topic of debate, particularly when similarly sized implants seem to appropriately fit the intervertebral space. Thus, this study compared the biomechanical performance of smaller and larger Zero‐P implants within an appropriate height range with that of oversized Zero‐P implants for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). Methods A three‐dimensional finite element (FE) model of the C2–C7 cervical spine was constructed and validated. The implants were categorized as smaller (6 mm), larger (7 mm), and oversized (8 mm) according to the average intervertebral height and implant specifications. Thus, the following four FE models were constructed: the intact cervical spine model (M1), the 6 mm model (M2), the 7 mm model (M3), and the 8 mm (M4) Zero‐P implant C5/6 segment ACDF surgical model. Then, a pure moment of 1.0 N·m combined with a follower load of 75 N was applied at C2 to simulate flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation. Results The results indicated that the maximum stress on the vertebral body, intervertebral disc, and facet joints under self‐weight increased with increasing Zero‐P height. Under six different loading conditions, the maximum stress on the vertebral body in the surgical segment of the M4 model was generally greater than that in the M2 and M3 models. Following an increase in the height of the implant from 6 mm to 8 mm, the maximum stress increased, and the intervertebral disc stress of both segments reached its peak in the M4 model. In the M4 model, the implant experienced the highest stress, whereas the M2 model exhibited the lowest stress on the implant under both self‐weight and loading conditions. Furthermore, the stress on the posterior facet joints of the surgical segment increased with increasing Zero‐P height. The range of maximum stress on the posterior facet joints for the M3 model was situated between that of the M2 and M4 models. Conclusion In summary, after determining the appropriate height range for the implant in accordance with the mean height of the intervertebral space, opting for a larger size appears to be more advantageous. This approach helps maintain the height of the intervertebral space and provides greater stress, promoting a tighter fit between the upper and lower endplates and the Zero‐P. This tighter fit is crucial for maintaining spinal stability, enhancing the early bony fusion rate, and potentially leading to better postoperative outcomes.https://doi.org/10.1111/os.14374anterior cervical discectomy and fusionbiomechanicsfinite element analysiszero‐P
spellingShingle Cheng‐yi Huang
Jun‐bo He
Xing‐Jin Wang
Ting‐kui Wu
Bei‐yu Wang
Jin Xu
Hao Liu
Biomechanical Effects of Zero‐P Height on Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Finite Element Study
Orthopaedic Surgery
anterior cervical discectomy and fusion
biomechanics
finite element analysis
zero‐P
title Biomechanical Effects of Zero‐P Height on Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Finite Element Study
title_full Biomechanical Effects of Zero‐P Height on Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Finite Element Study
title_fullStr Biomechanical Effects of Zero‐P Height on Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Finite Element Study
title_full_unstemmed Biomechanical Effects of Zero‐P Height on Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Finite Element Study
title_short Biomechanical Effects of Zero‐P Height on Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Finite Element Study
title_sort biomechanical effects of zero p height on anterior cervical discectomy and fusion a finite element study
topic anterior cervical discectomy and fusion
biomechanics
finite element analysis
zero‐P
url https://doi.org/10.1111/os.14374
work_keys_str_mv AT chengyihuang biomechanicaleffectsofzeropheightonanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionafiniteelementstudy
AT junbohe biomechanicaleffectsofzeropheightonanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionafiniteelementstudy
AT xingjinwang biomechanicaleffectsofzeropheightonanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionafiniteelementstudy
AT tingkuiwu biomechanicaleffectsofzeropheightonanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionafiniteelementstudy
AT beiyuwang biomechanicaleffectsofzeropheightonanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionafiniteelementstudy
AT jinxu biomechanicaleffectsofzeropheightonanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionafiniteelementstudy
AT haoliu biomechanicaleffectsofzeropheightonanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionafiniteelementstudy