Heating sensation in patients with and without spinal fixation devices during MRI examination at different magnetic field strengths

2018 ◽  
Vol 49 (2) ◽  
pp. 525-533 ◽  
Author(s):  
Taiki Yamaguchi ◽  
Yuichiro Abe ◽  
Yoshio Ichino ◽  
Shigenobu Satoh ◽  
Takeshi Masuda ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Field ◽  
Spinal Fixation ◽  
Mri Examination ◽  
Fixation Devices ◽  
Spinal Fixation Devices ◽  
Field Strengths

The Volume of Motion: Introduction, Derivation, and an Application Comparing Various Spinal Fixation Devices

1993 ◽  
Vol 115 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. J. Crisco
Keyword(s):  
Rigid Body ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Spinal Fixation ◽  
Dimensional Parameter ◽  
Directional Information ◽  
One Dimensional ◽  
Fixation Devices ◽  
Spinal Fixation Devices ◽  
Mathematical Derivation

Range of motion (ROM), the displacement between two limits, is one of the most common parameters used to describe joint kinematics. The ROM is a one-dimensional parameter, although the motion at many normal and pathological joints is three-dimensional. Certainly, the ROM yields vital information, but an overall measure of the three-dimensional mobility at a joint may also be useful. The volume of motion (VOM) is such a measure. The translational VOM is the volume defined by all possible ROMs of a point on a rigid body. The rotational VOM, although its interpretation is not as tangible as the translational VOM, is a measure of the three-dimensional rotational mobility of a rigid body. The magnitude of the VOM is proportional to mobility; the VOM is a scaler, which does not contain any directional information. Experimental determination of the VOM is not practical since it would require applying loads in an infinite number of directions. The mathematical derivation given here allows the VOM to be calculated, with the assumption of conservative elasticity, from the resultant displacements of three distinct load vectors of equal magnitude. An example of the VOM is presented in the comparison of the biomechanical stabilizing potential of various spinal fixation devices.

Clamping Stiffness and Its Influence on Load Distribution Between Paired Internal Spinal Fixation Devices

1996 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 234???240 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonius Rohlmann ◽  
Jorge Calisse ◽  
Georg Bergmann ◽  
Jens Radvan ◽  
Heinz-Michael Mayer
Keyword(s):  
Load Distribution ◽  
Spinal Fixation ◽  
Fixation Devices ◽  
Spinal Fixation Devices

F-0924 A Comparative Study on Stiffness and Stability of Spinal Fixation Devices.

2001 ◽  
Vol IV.01.1 (0) ◽  
pp. 73-74
Author(s):  
Hiroki KAWASHIMA ◽  
Ko TAKANO ◽  
Kazuhiro HASEGAWA ◽  
Toshiaki HARA
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Study ◽  
Spinal Fixation ◽  
Fixation Devices ◽  
Spinal Fixation Devices

A Reproducible Porcine Vertebral Fracture for Biomechanical Testing of Spinal Fixation Devices

1992 ◽  
Vol &NA; (284) ◽  
pp. 267???272 ◽  
Author(s):  
GORDON RUSSELL ◽  
GUY LAVOIE ◽  
ROBERT EVENSON ◽  
MARC MOREAU ◽  
DAVID BUDNEY ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Vertebral Fracture ◽  
Biomechanical Testing ◽  
Spinal Fixation ◽  
Fixation Devices ◽  
Spinal Fixation Devices

scholarly journals Role of mechanical factors in the evaluation of pedicle screw type spinal fixation devices

2005 ◽  
Vol 53 (4) ◽  
pp. 399 ◽  
Author(s):  
VK Goel ◽  
NA Ebraheim ◽  
A Biyani ◽  
S Rengachary ◽  
A Faizan
Keyword(s):  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Spinal Fixation ◽  
Fixation Devices ◽  
Mechanical Factors ◽  
Spinal Fixation Devices

Neurological Improvement Associated with Late Decompression of the Thoracolumbar Spinal Cord

Neurosurgery ◽  
1984 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 302-307
Author(s):  
J. Maiman Dennis ◽  
J. Larson Sanford ◽  
C. Benzel Edward
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Cord ◽  
Spinal Cord Injury ◽  
Spinal Canal ◽  
Spinal Instrumentation ◽  
Spinal Fixation ◽  
Neurological Improvement ◽  
Fixation Devices ◽  
Cord Injury ◽  
Spinal Fixation Devices ◽  
Premature Removal

Abstract We reviewed the cases of 20 patients admitted to our institution with thoracolumbar spinal cord injury who had previously undergone laminectomy and/or spinal instrumentation. Thirteen patients had a mass in the spinal canal, and 7 had kyphotic deformities. The lateral extracavitary approach to the spine and posterior stabilization when indicated were done in each. Seventeen patients obtained substantial neurological improvement. All 7 patients with kyphosis regained the ability to walk, as did all but 3 of the nonambulatory patients with a mass in the spinal canal. Morbidity was limited to pneumothorax and 1 case of late kyphosis associated with premature removal of the spinal fixation devices. Elective anterior approaches for reconstruction of the spinal canal with appropriate stabilization afford the best opportunity for neurological improvement in cases of thoracolumbar spinal cord injury.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document