Abstract:Objective To compare biomechanical properties of pedicle screw with different axial angles and interbody cage with different positions for unilateral transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) surgery. Methods The normal L3-5 finite element (FE) model was established and validated. Then one bilateral TILF reconstruction FE model and four unilateral TILF reconstruction FE models with different pedicle screw-cage combination types at L4-5 level were constructed, respectively. Namely, Model A (a small axial angle-implanted screw and an ipsilaterally-placed cage), Model B (a small axial angle-implanted screw and a contralaterally-placed cage), Model C (a large axial angle-implanted screw and an ipsilaterally-placed cage), Model D (a large axial angle-implanted screw and a contralaterally-placed cage). The range of motion (ROM) of 4 reconstruction models under various physiological stresses as well as the maximum Von Mises stresses on pedicle screw, cage-L4 inferior endplate were compared. Results The ROMs at fusion segment (L4-5) in 4 unilateral TLIF reconstruction models were significantly decreased compared with the normal model, but they were still larger than bilateral TLIF reconstruction model. For 4 unilateral TLIF reconstruction models, Model C showed the largest decrease in stability, and the ROM of Model C was 50.7%, 89.9%, 90.3% of the normal model in flexion-extension, lateral bending, axial rotation, respectively. When comparing the maximum Von Mises stress of posterior pedicle screw and cage-L4 inferior endplate in 4 unilateral TLIF reconstruction models, Model C could bear relatively smaller stress under most loading modes, except in ipsilateral lateral bending and axial rotation. Conclusions The unilateral TLIF reconstruction model with a large axial angle-implanted screw and an ipsilaterally placed-cage can achieve the optimal stability. By narrowing the difference in stability with the bilateral TILF model, the unilateral TLIF reconstruction model can reduce the risk of screw failure and cage subsidence, which is worth of clinical application.