Literature DB >> 26885199

Comparison of pullout strength of the thoracic pedicle screw between intrapedicular and extrapedicular technique: a meta-analysis and literature review.

Hua Wang1, Huafeng Wang2, Shilabant Sen Sribastav1, Fubiao Ye1, Chunxiang Liang1, Zemin Li1, Jianru Wang1, Hui Liu1, Xin Wang3, Zhaomin Zheng1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Intrapedicular fixation in thoracic spine is often limited, because of high risk of complication, especially in scoliosis patients. Extrapedicular screws fixation techniques provide an alternate solution for extremely small or abnormal thoracic pedicles deformity. However, the pullout resistance of extrapedicular screws has not been clearly defined. The aim of our study was to systematically review the existing evidence regarding the pullout resistance of thoracic extrapedicular screws compared with intrapedicular screws.
METHODS: A systematic search of all studies published through Nov 2014 was performed using Medline, EMBASE, OVID and other databases. All studies that compared the pullout resistance of thoracic extrapedicular screws with intrapedicular screws were selected. The data from the included studies were extracted and analyzed regarding pullout resistance force. Forest plots were constructed to summarize the data and compare the biomechanical stability achieved.
RESULTS: Five studies were included, with a total of 27 cadaveric specimens and 313 screws. The vertebral levels of the cadavers potted were T1-T8, T2-T12, T7-T9, T6-T11 and T4-T12 respectively. Overall, the results demonstrated that there was no significant difference in ultimate pullout strength between intrapedicular screws and extrapedicular screws (95% CI=-63.73 to 27.74; P=0.44); extrapedicular screws significantly increased the length of placements by a mean of 6.24 mm (95% CI=5.38 to 7.10; P<0.001); while the stiffness in intrapedicular screws was significantly stronger by a mean of 45.82 N/mm compared with extrapedicular screws (95% CI=-70.09 to -21.56; P<0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Meta-analysis of the existing literature showed that thoracic extrapedicular screws provided comparable but slightly lower pullout strength compared with intrapedicular screws, extrapedicular screws placement is much safer than intrapedicular screws. So thoracic extrapedicular screws offer a good alternative when it is hard to insert by intrapedicular approach, especially in scoliosis patients with severe vertebral deformities.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Thoracic spine; biomechanics; extrapedicular screw; intrapedicular screw; meta-analysis

Year:  2015        PMID: 26885199      PMCID: PMC4729985     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med        ISSN: 1940-5901


  28 in total

1.  Complications associated with pedicle screws.

Authors:  J E Lonstein; F Denis; J H Perra; M R Pinto; M D Smith; R B Winter
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 5.284

2.  A three-dimensional radiographic comparison of Cotrel-Dubousset and Colorado instrumentations for the correction of idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  S Delorme; H Labelle; C E Aubin; J A de Guise; C H Rivard; B Poitras; J Dansereau
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2000-01-15       Impact factor: 3.468

3.  Biomechanical evaluation of relationship of screw pullout strength, insertional torque, and bone mineral density in the cervical spine.

Authors:  Charles Alan Reitman; Lyndon Nguyen; Guy R Fogel
Journal:  J Spinal Disord Tech       Date:  2004-08

4.  Placement of pedicle screws in the thoracic spine. Part II: An anatomical and radiographic assessment.

Authors:  A R Vaccaro; S J Rizzolo; R A Balderston; T J Allardyce; S R Garfin; C Dolinskas; H S An
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1995-08       Impact factor: 5.284

5.  Complications of pediatric thoracolumbar and lumbar pedicle screws.

Authors:  C A Brown; L G Lenke; K H Bridwell; W M Geideman; S A Hasan; K Blanke
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1998-07-15       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  Reduction of severe spondylolisthesis in children.

Authors:  P R Harrington; H S Tullos
Journal:  South Med J       Date:  1969-01       Impact factor: 0.954

7.  Segmental pedicle screw instrumentation in idiopathic thoracolumbar and lumbar scoliosis.

Authors:  H Halm; T Niemeyer; T Link; U Liljenqvist
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  An anatomic, radiographic, and biomechanical assessment of extrapedicular screw fixation in the thoracic spine.

Authors:  M Dvorak; S MacDonald; K R Gurr; S I Bailey; R G Haddad
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1993-09-15       Impact factor: 3.468

9.  Morphometric analysis of anatomic scoliotic specimens.

Authors:  Stefan Parent; Hubert Labelle; Wafa Skalli; Bruce Latimer; Jacques de Guise
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2002-11-01       Impact factor: 3.468

10.  Placement of pedicle screws in the thoracic spine. Part I: Morphometric analysis of the thoracic vertebrae.

Authors:  A R Vaccaro; S J Rizzolo; T J Allardyce; M Ramsey; J Salvo; R A Balderston; J M Cotler
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1995-08       Impact factor: 5.284

View more
  3 in total

1.  Accuracy of cannulated pedicle screw versus conventional pedicle screw for extra-pedicular screw placement in dysplastic pedicles without cancellous channel in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a computerized tomography (CT) analysis.

Authors:  Chee Kean Lee; Chris Yin Wei Chan; Siti Mariam Abd Gani; Mun Keong Kwan
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2017-08-17       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Surgery vs conservative treatment for type II and III odontoid fractures in a geriatric population: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Lei Fan; Dingqiang Ou; Xuna Huang; Mao Pang; Xiu-Xing Chen; Bu Yang; Qi-You Wang
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 1.817

3.  Clinical application of the pedicle in vitro restorer in percutaneous kyphoplasty.

Authors:  Yimin Qi; Yiwen Zeng; Dalin Wang; Jisheng Sui; Qiang Wang
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2018-10-25       Impact factor: 2.359

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.