Differences in 3D vs. 2D analysis in lumbar spinal fusion simulations

Abstract Lumbar interbody fusion is currently the gold standard in treating patients with disc degeneration or segmental instability. Despite it having been used for several decades, the non-union rate remains high. A failed fusion is frequently attributed to an inadequate mechanical environment after instrumentation. Finite element (FE) models can provide insights into the mechanics of the fusion process. Previous fusion simulations using FE models showed that the geometries and material of the cage can greatly influence the fusion outcome. However, these studies used axisymmetric models which lacked realistic spinal geometries. Therefore, different modeling approaches were evaluated to understand the bone-formation process. Three FE models of the lumbar motion segment (L4–L5) were developed: 2D, Sym-3D and Nonsym-3D. The fusion process based on existing mechano-regulation algorithms using the FE simulations to evaluate the mechanical environment was then integrated into these models. In addition, the influence of different lordotic angles (5, 10 and 15°) was investigated. The volume of newly formed bone, the axial stiffness of the whole segment and bone distribution inside and surrounding the cage were evaluated. In contrast to the Nonsym-3D, the 2D and Sym-3D models predicted excessive bone formation prior to bridging (peak values with 36 and 9% higher than in equilibrium, respectively). The 3D models predicted a more uniform bone distribution compared to the 2D model. The current results demonstrate the crucial role of the realistic 3D geometry of the lumbar motion segment in predicting bone formation after lumbar spinal fusion.