With the advancement of minimally invasive spinal surgery, pedicle screw fixation is a key approach for spinal disease treatment. However, achieving reliable fixation in osteoporotic bone remains challenging. This study evaluates the pullout performance of eight pedicle screw types across different bone densities using 3D-printed screws and rigid polyurethane foam models. Pullout strength, equivalent force, and maximum deflection were assessed via mechanical testing and finite element analysis. Cement-Augmented (CA) and Expandable (EPS) screws exhibited superior pullout resistance in osteoporosis, while Double Pitch (DP) and Double Threaded (DT) screws performed best in healthy bone, and Double Double Core (DDC) and New Double Threaded (NDT) screws excelled in osteopenia. Finite element results closely matched experimental data, confirming reliability. The findings highlight the significant influence of bone density on screw fixation and provide guidance for clinical selection. Future research will focus on novel screw designs to enhance surgical outcomes.
QiWYanYZhangY, et al. Study of stress distribution in pedicle screws along a continuum of diameters: a three-dimensional finite element analysis. Orthop Surg2011; 3: 57–63.
3.
HeiniPF.The current treatment—a survey of osteoporotic fracture treatment. Osteoporotic spine fractures: the spine surgeon’s perspective. Osteoporos Int2005; 16: S85–S92.
4.
KendlerDLBauerDCDavisonKS, et al. Vertebral fractures: clinical importance and management. Am J Med2016; 129: 221.e1–221.e10.
5.
JohnellOKanisJ.Epidemiology of osteoporotic fractures. Osteoporos Int2005; 16: S3–S7.
6.
ZouDMuheremuASunZ, et al. Computed tomography Hounsfield unit–based prediction of pedicle screw loosening after surgery for degenerative lumbar spine disease. J Neurosurg Spine2020; 32: 716–721.
7.
TanakaHMinowaKSatohT, et al. Bone atrophy at high altitude. J Bone Miner Metab1992; 10: 31–36.
8.
ZhongHZhouYWangP, et al. Influencing factors of bone mass abnormalities among postmenopausal women in Tibet, China. BMC Public Health2023; 23: 2100.
9.
KatonisPChristoforakisJAligizakisAC, et al. Complications and problems related to pedicle screw fixation of the spine. Clin Orthop Relat Res2003; 411: 86–94.
10.
CharlesYPPelletierHHydierP, et al. Pullout characteristics of percutaneous pedicle screws with different cement augmentation methods in elderly spines: an in vitro biomechanical study. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res2015; 101: 369–374.
11.
ChomaTJPfeifferFMSwopeRW, et al. Pedicle screw design and cement augmentation in osteoporotic vertebrae: effects of fenestrations and cement viscosity on fixation and extraction. Spine2012; 37: E1628–E1632.
12.
BullmannVLiljenqvistURRödlR, et al. Pedikelschraubenaugmentation aus biomechanischer Sicht. Orthopäde2010; 39: 673–678.
13.
WidmerJAubinCEVan LentheGH, et al. Editorial: innovations to improve screw fixation in traumatology and orthopedic surgery. Front Bioeng Biotechnol2022; 10: 1094813.
14.
TaiCLTsaiTTLaiPL, et al. A biomechanical comparison of expansive pedicle screws for severe osteoporosis: the effects of screw design and cement augmentation. PLoS One2015; 10: e0146294.
15.
RahyussalimAJKurniawatiTBesriNN, et al. Osteoporotic pedicle screw: review of various types of pedicle screw and cement augmentation. AIP Conf Proc2019; 2092: 020003.
16.
BriggsAMWrigleyTVVan DieënJH, et al. The effect of osteoporotic vertebral fracture on predicted spinal loads in vivo. Eur Spine J2006; 15: 1785–1795.
17.
SanjayDBhardwajJSKumarN, et al. Expandable pedicle screw may have better fixation than normal pedicle screw: preclinical investigation on instrumented L4-L5 vertebrae based on various physiological movements. Med Biol Eng Comput2022; 60: 2501–2519.
18.
WengFWangJYangL, et al. Application value of expansive pedicle screw in the lumbar short segment fixation and fusion for osteoporosis patients. Exp Ther Med2018; 16: 1241–1246.
19.
KimJHAhnDKShinWS, et al. Clinical effects and complications of pedicle screw augmentation with bone cement: comparison of fenestrated screw augmentation and vertebroplasty augmentation. Clin Orthop Surg2020; 12: 194–200.
20.
EinafsharMHashemiAvan LentheGH.Replacement of destructive pull-out test with modal analysis in primary fixation stability assessment of spinal pedicle screw. Arch Bone Jt Surg2022; 10: 204–212.
21.
OhBHKimJYLeeJB, et al. Screw insertional torque measurement in spine surgery: correlation with bone mineral density and hounsfield unit. Neurospine2023; 20: 1177–1185.
22.
TaiCLChenWPLiuMY, et al. Biomechanical comparison of pedicle screw fixation strength among three different screw trajectories using single vertebrae and one-level functional spinal unit. Front Bioeng Biotechnol2022; 10: 1054738.
23.
YangJXLuoLLiuJH, et al. Incomplete insertion of pedicle screws triggers a higher biomechanical risk of screw loosening: mechanical tests and corresponding numerical simulations. Front Bioeng Biotechnol2024; 11: 1282512.
24.
LiuSQiWZhangY, et al. Effect of bone material properties on effective region in screw-bone model: an experimental and finite element study. Biomed Eng Online2014; 13: 83.
25.
AnniwaerAYinZZhuJ, et al. Comparison of three implant systems under preload loss: a finite element analysis validated by digital image correlation methods. J Prosthodont Res2025; 69(2): 285–293.
26.
RosaGLClientiCMineoR, et al. Experimental analysis of pedicle screws. Proc Struct Integr2016; 2: 1244–1251.
27.
BoulwareLERatnerLECooperLA, et al. Whole body donation for medical science: a population-based study. Clin Anat2004; 17: 570–577.
28.
De KaterEPSakesAEdströmE, et al. Beyond the pedicle screw–a patent review. Eur Spine J2022; 31: 1553–1565.
29.
KimYYChoiWSRhyuKW.Assessment of pedicle screw pullout strength based on various screw designs and bone densities—an ex vivo biomechanical study. Spine J2012; 12: 164–168.
30.
AmaritsakulYChaoCKLinJ.Biomechanical evaluation of bending strength of spinal pedicle screws, including cylindrical, conical, dual core and double dual core designs using numerical simulations and mechanical tests. Med Eng Phys2014; 36: 1218–1223.
31.
YaoGLXiaoZZXiaoT, et al. Development and biomechanical test of a new pedicle screw for thoracolumbar spinal surgery. Med Eng Phys2022; 104: 103808.
32.
BiancoRJArnouxPJWagnacE, et al. Minimizing pedicle screw pullout risks: a detailed biomechanical analysis of screw design and placement. Clin Spine Surg2017; 30: E226–E232.
33.
WachterNJKrischakGDMentzelM, et al. Correlation of bone mineral density with strength and microstructural parameters of cortical bone in vitro. Bone2002; 31: 90–95.
34.
KopperdahlDLMorganEFKeavenyTM.Quantitative computed tomography estimates of the mechanical properties of human vertebral trabecular bone. J Orthop Res2002; 20: 801–805.
35.
WangWBaranGRGargH, et al. The benefits of cement augmentation of pedicle screw fixation are increased in osteoporotic bone: a finite element analysis. Spine Deform2014; 2: 248–259.
36.
ZhangXChenTMengF, et al. A finite element analysis on different bone cement forms and injection volumes injected into lumbar vertebral body in percutaneous kyphoplasty. BMC Musculoskelet Disord2022; 23: 621.
37.
ChaoCKHsuCCWangJL, et al. Increasing bending strength and pullout strength in conical pedicle screws: biomechanical tests and finite element analyses. J Spinal Disord Tech2008; 21: 130–138.
38.
WeiserLHuberGSellenschlohK, et al. Insufficient stability of pedicle screws in osteoporotic vertebrae: biomechanical correlation of bone mineral density and pedicle screw fixation strength. Eur Spine J2017; 26: 2891–2897.
39.
MatsukawaKYatoYImabayashiH.Impact of screw diameter and length on pedicle screw fixation strength in osteoporotic vertebrae: a finite element analysis. Asian Spine J2021; 15: 566–574.
40.
ViezensLSellenschlohKPüschelK, et al. Impact of screw diameter on pedicle screw fatigue strength—a biomechanical evaluation. World Neurosurg2021; 152: e369–e376.
41.
KuenyRAKolbJPLehmannW, et al. Influence of the screw augmentation technique and a diameter increase on pedicle screw fixation in the osteoporotic spine: pullout versus fatigue testing. Eur Spine J2014; 23: 2196–2202.
42.
VishnubhotlaSMcGarryWBMaharAT, et al. A titanium expandable pedicle screw improves initial pullout strength as compared with standard pedicle screws. Spine J2011; 11: 777–781.
43.
WeiserL.Cortical threaded pedicle screw improves fatigue strength in decreased bone quality. Eur Spine J2021; 30: 691–697.
44.
KubiakAJLindqvist-JonesKDearnKD, et al. Comparison of the mechanical properties of two designs of polyaxial pedicle screw. Eng Fail Anal2019; 95: 96–106.
