Literature DB >> 20581763

Surgical management of two- versus three-column injuries of the cervicothoracic junction: biomechanical comparison of translaminar screw and pedicle screw fixation using a cadaveric model.

Ryan M Kretzer1, Nianbin Hu, Jun Kikkawa, Ira M Garonzik, George I Jallo, P Justin Tortolani, Paul C McAfee, Bryan W Cunningham.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: An in vitro cadaveric biomechanical study.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the stability of translaminar screws compared to pedicle screws at T1-T2 for constructs bridging the cervicothoracic junction. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Instrumented fixation of the cervicothoracic junction is challenging both biomechanically, due to the transition from the mobile cervical to the rigid thoracic spine, and technically, due to the anatomic constraints of the T1-T2 pedicles. For these reasons, an alternate fixation technique at T1-T2 that combines ease of screw insertion and a favorable safety profile with biomechanical stability would be clinically beneficial.
METHODS: A 6-degree of freedom spine simulator was used to test multidirectional flexibility in 8 human cadaveric specimens. Flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation were tested in the intact condition, followed by destabilization via a simulated 2-column injury at C7-T1. Specimens were reconstructed using C5-C6 lateral mass screws and either translaminar or pedicle screws placed at T1, followed by caudal extension to T2. A 3-column injury at C7-T1 was then performed and specimens were tested using a posterior only approach with either translaminar or pedicle screws placed at T1 and T1-T2. Finally, anterior fixation at C7-T1 was added and multidirectional flexibility testing performed as previously described.
RESULTS: Following a 2-column injury at C7-T1, there were no significant differences in segmental flexibility at C7-T1 between translaminar and pedicle screw fixation when placed at T1-T2 (P>0.05). For a 3-column injury treated posteriorly, translaminar screws at T1-T2 provided increased flexibility compared to pedicle screws in flexion/extension (P<0.05). There were no differences in segmental flexibility at C7-T1 between the 2 techniques following the addition of anterior fixation (P>0.05).
CONCLUSION: Translaminar screws in the upper thoracic spine offer similar stability to pedicle screw fixation for constructs bridging the cervicothoracic junction. Small differences in range of motion must be weighed clinically against the potential benefits of translaminar screw insertion at T1-T2.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20581763     DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181c9f56c

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  4 in total

Review 1.  Use of intraoperative fluoroscopy for the safe placement of C2 laminar screws: technical note.

Authors:  John A Engler; Michael L Smith
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-08-05       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Feasibility of translaminar screw placement in Korean population: morphometric analysis of cervical spine.

Authors:  Gyu Yeul Ji; Chang Hyun Oh; Sang Hyuk Park; Ferry Kurniawan; Junho Lee; Jae Kyun Jeon; Dong Ah Shin; Keung Nyun Kim
Journal:  Yonsei Med J       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 2.759

3.  Feasibility of Sub-Axial Cervical Laminar Screws, Including C7, in the Indian Population: A Study on 50 Patients Using Computed Tomography-Based Morphometry Measurements.

Authors:  Abhishek Srivastava; Geetanjali Nanda; Rajat Mahajan; Ankur Nanda; Sahil Batra; Nirajana Mishra; Naveen Pandita; Harvinder Singh Chhabra
Journal:  Asian Spine J       Date:  2018-10-18

Review 4.  Biomechanics and Clinical Application of Translaminar Screws Fixation in Spine: A Review of the Literature.

Authors:  Jimmy J Chan; Nicholas Shepard; Woojin Cho
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2018-04-19
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.