dc.contributor.advisor | Carlson, Brandon B | |
dc.contributor.advisor | Choi, Won S | |
dc.contributor.author | Torres, Kabir | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-07-21T17:46:30Z | |
dc.date.available | 2021-07-21T17:46:30Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2021-08-31 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2021 | |
dc.identifier.other | http://dissertations.umi.com/ku:17893 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/1808/31791 | |
dc.description.abstract | IntroductionCement augmentation is a commonly performed procedure by spine surgeons as well as interventional radiologists. The ultimate goal of cement augmentation is to aid a vertebral body in resisting axial stresses. Understanding the difference between traditional and modern techniques in cement augmentation is therefore important in providing the best possible augmentation technique. Objective: To compare the traditional technique of using a cannulated needle to introduce cement followed by a non-cannulated, non-fenestrated screw against introduction of cement through a cannulated, fenestrated screw. Materials and Methods: Eight cadaveric spines were used. The T8-L1 vertebrae were dissected, divided into their respective groups, potted in a resin, augmented and subjected to increasing axial loading. | |
dc.format.extent | 29 pages | |
dc.language.iso | en | |
dc.publisher | University of Kansas | |
dc.rights | Copyright held by the author. | |
dc.subject | Bioengineering | |
dc.title | Biomechanical analysis of vertebral body load-to-failure after cement augmentation with polymethylmethacrylate cement augmentation performed using two different techniques | |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.contributor.cmtemember | Burton, Douglas C | |
dc.thesis.degreeDiscipline | Population Health | |
dc.thesis.degreeLevel | M.S. | |
dc.identifier.orcid | https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8743-7779 | en_US |
dc.rights.accessrights | openAccess | |