Literature DB >> 10413131

A biomechanical evaluation of occipitocervical instrumentation: screw compared with wire fixation.

R J Hurlbert1, N R Crawford, W G Choi, C A Dickman.   

Abstract

OBJECT: The purpose of this study was to compare cable techniques used in occipitocervical fixation with two types of screw fixation. The authors hypothesized that screw fixation would provide superior immobilization compared with cable methods.
METHODS: Ten cadaveric specimens were prepared for biomechanical analyses by using standard techniques. Angular and linear displacement data were recorded from the occiput to C-6 with infrared optical sensors after conditioning runs. Specimens underwent retesting after fatiguing. Six methods of fixation were analyzed: Steinmann pin with and without C-1 incorporation; Cotrel-Dubousett horseshoe with and without C-1 incorporation; Mayfield loop with C1-2 transarticular screw fixation; and a custom-designed occipitocervical transarticular screw-plate system. Sublaminar techniques were extended to include C-3 in the fusion construct, whereas transarticular techniques incorporated the occiput, C-1, and C-2 only. All methods of fixation provided significant immobilization in all specimens compared with the nonconstrained destabilized state. Despite incorporation of an additional vertebral segment, sublaminar techniques performed worse as a function of applied load than screw fixation techniques. Following fatiguing, these differences were more pronounced. The sublaminar techniques failed most prominently in flexion-extension and in axial rotation. On gross inspection, increased angular displacement associated with loosening of the sublaminar cables was observed.
CONCLUSION: Occipitocervical fixation can be performed using a variety of techniques; all bestow significant immobilization compared with the destabilized spine. All methods tested in this study were susceptible to fatigue and loss of reduction and were weakest in resisting vertical settling. Screw fixation of the occiput-C2 reduces the number of vertebral segments that are necessary to incorporate into the fusion construct while providing superior immobilization and resistance to fatigue and vertical settling compared with sublaminar methods.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10413131     DOI: 10.3171/spi.1999.90.1.0084

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosurg        ISSN: 0022-3085            Impact factor:   5.115


  19 in total

1.  Biomechanical comparison of inside-outside screws, cables, and regular screws, using a sawbone model.

Authors:  Yusuf Sukru Caglar; Fuat Torun; Thomas Glenn Pait; William Hogue; Melih Bozkurt; Serdar Ozgen
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2004-10-08       Impact factor: 3.042

Review 2.  Anatomy and biomechanics of normal craniovertebral junction (a) and biomechanics of stabilization (b).

Authors:  Arnold H Menezes; Vincent C Traynelis
Journal:  Childs Nerv Syst       Date:  2008-04-04       Impact factor: 1.475

Review 3.  Atlanto-occipital dislocation.

Authors:  Graham C Hall; Michael J Kinsman; Ryan G Nazar; Rob T Hruska; Kevin J Mansfield; Maxwell Boakye; Ralph Rahme
Journal:  World J Orthop       Date:  2015-03-18

4.  The timing of fusion surgery for clival chordoma with occipito-cervical joint instability: before or after tumor resection?

Authors:  Hun Ho Park; Jeong-Yoon Park; Dong-Kyu Chin; Kyu-Sung Lee; Chang-Ki Hong
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2018-08-16       Impact factor: 3.042

5.  Comparison of structural allograft and traditional autograft technique in occipitocervical fusion: radiological and clinical outcomes from a single institution.

Authors:  Jakub Godzik; Vijay M Ravindra; Wilson Z Ray; Meic H Schmidt; Erica F Bisson; Andrew T Dailey
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2015-05-08

6.  Surgical treatment of craniovertebral junction instability : clinical outcomes and effectiveness in personal experience.

Authors:  Gyo-Chang Song; Kyoung-Suok Cho; Do-Sung Yoo; Pil-Woo Huh; Sang-Bok Lee
Journal:  J Korean Neurosurg Soc       Date:  2010-07-31

7.  Craniovertebral junction lesions: our experience with the transoral surgical approach.

Authors:  Homère Mouchaty; Paolo Perrini; Renato Conti; Nicola Di Lorenzo
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2009-04-29       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 8.  [Tumors and metastases of the upper cervical spine (C0-2). A special challenge].

Authors:  D J Jeszenszky; D Haschtmann; O Pröbstl; F S Kleinstück; C E Heyde; T F Fekete
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 1.087

9.  Two asymmetric contoured plate-rods for occipito-cervical fusion.

Authors:  E B Bongartz
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2004-01-08       Impact factor: 3.134

10.  Three-Dimensional-Printed Drill Guides for Occipitothoracic Fusion in a Pediatric Patient With Occipitocervical Instability.

Authors:  Peter A J Pijpker; Jos M A Kuijlen; Bart L Kaptein; Willem Pondaag
Journal:  Oper Neurosurg (Hagerstown)       Date:  2021-06-15       Impact factor: 2.703

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.