umu.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Does pedicle screw fixation of the subaxial cervical spine provide adequate stabilization in a multilevel vertebral body fracture model?: An in vitro biomechanical study
Show others and affiliations
2018 (English)In: Clinical Biomechanics, ISSN 0268-0033, E-ISSN 1879-1271, Vol. 53, p. 72-78Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

BACKGROUND: Cervical vertebral body fractures generally are treated through an anterior-posterior approach. Cervical pedicle screws offer an alternative to circumferential fixation. This biomechanical study quantifies whether cervical pedicle screws alone can restore the stability of a three-column vertebral body fracture, making standard 360° reconstruction unnecessary.

METHODS: Range of motion (2.0 Nm) in flexion-extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation was tested on 10 cadaveric specimens (five/group) at C2-T1 with a spine kinematics simulator. Specimens were tested for flexibility of intact when a fatigue protocol with instrumentation was used to evaluate construct longevity. For a C4-6 fracture, spines were instrumented with 360° reconstruction (corpectomy spacer + plate + lateral mass screws) (Group 1) or cervical pedicle screw reconstruction (C3 and C7 only) (Group 2).

FINDINGS: Results are expressed as percentage of intact (100%). In Group 1, 360° reconstruction resulted in decreased motion during flexion-extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation, to 21.5%, 14.1%, and 48.6%, respectively, following 18,000 cycles of flexion-extension testing. In Group 2, cervical pedicle screw reconstruction led to reduced motion after cyclic flexion-extension testing, to 38.4%, 12.3%, and 51.1% during flexion-extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation, respectively.

INTERPRETATION: The 360° stabilization procedure provided the greatest initial stability. Cervical pedicle screw reconstruction resulted in less change in motion following cyclic loading with less variation from specimen to specimen, possibly caused by loosening of the shorter lateral mass screws. Cervical pedicle screw stabilization may be a viable alternative to 360° reconstruction for restoring multilevel vertebral body fracture.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier, 2018. Vol. 53, p. 72-78
Keywords [en]
Anterior column support, Biomechanical, Cervical, Lateral mass screw, Multilevel fracture, Pedicle screw
National Category
Orthopaedics
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-159090DOI: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2018.02.009ISI: 000430645400011PubMedID: 29455101OAI: oai:DiVA.org:umu-159090DiVA, id: diva2:1316381
Available from: 2019-05-17 Created: 2019-05-17 Last updated: 2019-05-28Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Bobinski, Lukas
In the same journal
Clinical Biomechanics
Orthopaedics

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 13 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf