| 1. |
- Daniel, Roy T, et al.
(author)
-
Biomechanical Assessment of Stabilization of Simulated Type II Odontoid Fracture with Case Study
- 2017
-
In: Asian Spine Journal. - : Asian Spine Journal (ASJ). - 1976-1902 .- 1976-7846. ; 11:1, s. 15-23
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- STUDY DESIGN: Researchers created a proper type II dens fracture (DF) and quantified a novel current posterior fixation technique with spacers at C1-C2. A clinical case study supplements this biomechanical analysis.PURPOSE: Researchers explored their hypothesis that spacers combined with posterior instrumentation (PI) reduce range of motion significantly, possibly leading to better fusion outcomes.OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: Literature shows that the atlantoaxial joint is unique in allowing segmental rotary motion, enabling head turning. With no intervertebral discs at these joints, multiple ligaments bind the axis to the skull base and to the atlas; an intact odontoid (dens) enhances stability. The most common traumatic injury at these strong ligaments is a type II odontoid fracture.METHODS: Each of seven specimens (C0-C3) was tested on a custom-built six-degrees-of-freedom spine simulator with constructs of intact state, type II DF, C1-C2 PI, PI with joint capsulotomy (PIJC), PI with spacers (PIS) at C1-C2, and spacers alone (SA). A bending moment of 2.0 Nm (1.5°/sec) was applied in flexion-extension (FE), lateral bending (LB), and axial rotation (AR). One-way analysis of variance with repeated measures was performed.RESULTS: DF increased motion to 320%, 429%, and 120% versus intact (FE, LB, and AR, respectively). PI significantly reduced motion to 41%, 21%, and 8%. PIJC showed negligible changes from PI. PIS reduced motion to 16%, 14%, and 3%. SA decreased motion to 64%, 24%, and 54%. Reduced motion facilitated solid fusion in an 89-year-old female patient within 1 year.CONCLUSIONS: Type II odontoid fractures can lead to acute or chronic instability. Current fixation techniques use C1-C2 PI or an anterior dens screw. Addition of spacers alongside PI led to increased biomechanical rigidity over intact motion and may offer an alternative to established surgical fixation techniques.
|
|
| 2. |
- Duff, John, et al.
(author)
-
Does pedicle screw fixation of the subaxial cervical spine provide adequate stabilization in a multilevel vertebral body fracture model? : An in vitro biomechanical study
- 2018
-
In: Clinical Biomechanics. - : Elsevier. - 0268-0033 .- 1879-1271. ; 53, s. 72-78
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- 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.
|
|
