Biomechanical analysis of transpedicular screw fixation in the subaxial cervical spine
- PMID: 15534407
- DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000137287.67388.0b
Biomechanical analysis of transpedicular screw fixation in the subaxial cervical spine
Abstract
Study design: An in vitro biomechanical study to compare 2 different dorsal screw fixation techniques in the cervical spine with respect to primary stability and stability after cyclic loading.
Objectives: To investigate if the biomechanical stability is better in pedicle screw or in lateral mass fixation.
Summary of background data: In patients with poor bone quality who require multisegmental fixations, the current dorsal stabilization procedures in the subaxial cervical spine using lateral mass screws are often insufficient. Cervical pedicle screw fixation has been suggested as an alternative procedure, but there are still limited data available on the biomechanical differences between pedicle screw and lateral mass fixation.
Methods: A severe multilevel discoligamentous instability was created in 8 human cervical spine specimens (C2-C7). Dorsal stabilization was performed with the assistance of computer navigation (SurgiGate, Medivison, Switzerland) using either lateral mass or pedicle screw fixation. In the first part of the study, primary stability was measured by means of a multidirectional flexibility test. Then, specimens were divided into 2 groups, randomized for bone mineral density. Cyclic loading was applied with sinusoidal loads in flexion/extension (1000 cycles, +/-1.5 Nm, 0.1 Hz). Mechanical behavior of the specimens was determined by a flexibility test before and after the application of cyclic loads. Data analysis was performed by calculating the ranges of motion, and statistical differences were determined with the t test for group comparison.
Results: Pedicle screw fixation showed a significantly higher stability in lateral bending (pedicle screw range of motion 0.86 +/- 0.31 degrees; lateral mass range of motion 1.43 +/- 0.62 degrees; P = 0.037). No significant differences were seen in flexion/extension and axial rotation. After cyclic loading, the decrease in stability was less with pedicle screw fixation in all load directions. Differences in the decrease of stability were statistically significant in flexion/extension (pedicle screw 95.4 +/- 9.4%; lateral mass 70.5 +/- 9.8%; P = 0.010) and lateral bending (pedicle screw 105.3 +/- 5.0%; lateral mass 84.2 +/- 13.6%; P = 0.046), whereas there was no significant difference in axial rotation.
Conclusions: The major finding of the current study was the higher stability of pedicle screws over lateral mass fixation with respect to primary stability and stability after cyclic loading. From a biomechanical point of view the use of pedicle screws in the subaxial cervical spine seems justified in patients with poor bone quality and need for multisegmental fixation.
Similar articles
-
Does pedicle screw fixation of the subaxial cervical spine provide adequate stabilization in a multilevel vertebral body fracture model? An in vitro biomechanical study.Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2018 Mar;53:72-78. doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2018.02.009. Epub 2018 Feb 14. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2018. PMID: 29455101
-
Biomechanical analysis of screw constructs for atlantoaxial fixation in cadavers: a systematic review and meta-analysis.J Neurosurg Spine. 2015 Feb;22(2):151-61. doi: 10.3171/2014.10.SPINE13805. Epub 2014 Dec 5. J Neurosurg Spine. 2015. PMID: 25478824 Review.
-
Biomechanical comparison between C-7 lateral mass and pedicle screws in subaxial cervical constructs. Presented at the 2009 Joint Spine Meeting. Laboratory investigation.J Neurosurg Spine. 2010 Dec;13(6):688-94. doi: 10.3171/2010.5.SPINE09712. J Neurosurg Spine. 2010. PMID: 21121745
-
Biomechanical comparison of two-level cervical locking posterior screw/rod and hook/rod techniques.Spine J. 2007 Mar-Apr;7(2):194-204. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2006.04.015. Epub 2006 Dec 22. Spine J. 2007. PMID: 17321969
-
[Advance of lower cervical spine pedicle screw fixation in treatment of lower cervical spine instability].Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2003 Jul;17(4):286-8. Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2003. PMID: 12920715 Review. Chinese.
Cited by
-
Free-hand technique of C7 pedicle screw insertion using a simply defined entry point without fluoroscopic guidance for cervical spondylotic myelopathy patients with C3 to C6 instrumented by lateral mass screws: a retrospective cohort study.BMC Surg. 2024 Feb 29;24(1):74. doi: 10.1186/s12893-024-02358-7. BMC Surg. 2024. PMID: 38424546 Free PMC article.
-
The role of cervical pedicle screw in cervical spine trauma: A single-center retrospective study.J Craniovertebr Junction Spine. 2023 Jul-Sep;14(3):299-305. doi: 10.4103/jcvjs.jcvjs_19_23. Epub 2023 Sep 18. J Craniovertebr Junction Spine. 2023. PMID: 37860022 Free PMC article.
-
Accuracy of Lateral Mass Screw Insertion during Cervical Spine Surgery without Fluoroscopic Guidance and Comparison of Postoperative Screw Loosening Rate among Unicortical and Bicortical Screws Using Computed Tomography.Spine Surg Relat Res. 2022 Jun 13;6(6):625-630. doi: 10.22603/ssrr.2022-0055. eCollection 2022 Nov 27. Spine Surg Relat Res. 2022. PMID: 36561156 Free PMC article.
-
Comparison of Perpendicular to the Coronal Plane versus Medial Inclination for C2 Pedicle Screw Insertion Assisted by 3D Printed Navigation Template.Orthop Surg. 2023 Feb;15(2):563-571. doi: 10.1111/os.13535. Epub 2022 Oct 11. Orthop Surg. 2023. PMID: 36220773 Free PMC article.
-
Patient-Specific Drill Guide Template for Pedicle Screw Insertion into the Atlantoaxial Cervical Spine Using Stereolithographic Modeling: An In Vitro Study.Asian Spine J. 2023 Feb;17(1):8-16. doi: 10.31616/asj.2021.0362. Epub 2022 Sep 27. Asian Spine J. 2023. PMID: 36163679 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Research Materials
Miscellaneous