Literature DB >> 8816645

Biomechanical study of screws in the lateral masses: variables affecting pull-out resistance.

J G Heller1, B T Estes, M Zaouali, A Diop.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of the design of the screw, the depth of insertion, the vertebral level, and the quality of the host bone on the pull-out resistance of screws used in the lateral masses. The study included twelve fresh cervical spines from human cadavera. Radiographs were made of each specimen to ensure the absence of defects, and then the cancellous-bone density of the vertebral bodies was measured at each level with quantitative computed tomography scanning. Six commercially available screws of various diameters and thread configurations (2.7, 3.2, 3.5, and 4.5-millimeter cortical-bone screws; a 3.5-millimeter cancellous-bone screw; and a 3.5-millimeter self-tapping screw) that are currently used for fixation of the cervical lateral masses were tested for axial load to failure. A twelve-by-twelve Latin square design was used to randomize the screws with regard to level (second through seventh cervical vertebrae), side (right and left), and depth of insertion (unicortical or bicortical purchase). Each screw was then subjected to uniaxial load to failure. The data were analyzed to determine if the diameter of the screw, the thread configuration, the number of cortices engaged, the cervical level, or the bone density was associated with the load to failure. Three major subgroups (greatest, intermediate, and lowest pull-out resistance) were identified. The subgroup with the greatest pull-out resistance included only screws with bicortical purchase; the 3.2, 3.5, and 4.5-millimeter cortical-bone screws and the 3.5-millimeter cancellous-bone screw were in this subgroup. Regardless of the thread configuration, no screw with unicortical purchase was in the group with the greatest pull-out resistance. Two of the three values in the subgroup with the lowest pull-out resistance were for the 3.5-millimeter self-tapping screw (with unicortical or bicortical purchase). The cancellous-bone density of the vertebral body was not associated with pull-out resistance and it did not vary significantly according to the cervical level, with the numbers available. However, the pull-out resistance of the screws varied significantly (p = 0.004) by level: it was the greatest at the fourth cervical level, decreasing cephalad and caudad to that level.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8816645     DOI: 10.2106/00004623-199609000-00004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am        ISSN: 0021-9355            Impact factor:   5.284


  24 in total

1.  Factors affecting the interface of cervical spine facet screws placed in the technique by Roy-Camille et al.

Authors:  T R Pitzen; S Zenner; D Barbier; T Georg; W I Steudel
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2004-03-27       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Load sharing properties of cervical pedicle screw-rod constructs versus lateral mass screw-rod constructs.

Authors:  Bradley J Dunlap; Eldin E Karaikovic; Hyung-Soon Park; Mark J Sokolowski; Li-Qun Zhang
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2010-02-02       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Comparative analysis of three different cervical lateral mass screw fixation techniques by complications and bicortical purchase : cadaveric study.

Authors:  Jin-Wook Baek; Dong-Mook Park; Dae-Hyun Kim
Journal:  J Korean Neurosurg Soc       Date:  2010-09-30

4.  How pilot-hole size affects bone-screw pullout strength in human cadaveric cancellous bone.

Authors:  Mark Steeves; Craig Stone; John Mogaard; Stephanie Byrne
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 2.089

5.  Cervical anterior transpedicular screw fixation (ATPS)--Part II. Accuracy of manual insertion and pull-out strength of ATPS.

Authors:  Heiko Koller; Frank Acosta; Mark Tauber; Michael Fox; Hudelmaier Martin; Rosmarie Forstner; Peter Augat; Rainer Penzkofer; Christian Pirich; H Kässmann; Herbert Resch; Wolfgang Hitzl
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2008-01-26       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  Quantitative Gross and CT measurements of Cadaveric Cervical Vertebrae (C3 - C6) as Guidelines for the Lateral mass screw fixation.

Authors:  Santosh K Sangari; Thomas E Heinneman; Mathew S Conti; Paul-Michel F Dossous; David J Dillon; Apostolos J Tsiouris; Se Young Pyo; Estomih P Mtui; Roger Härtl
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2016-12-20

7.  Cervical spine bone density in young healthy adults as a function of sex, vertebral level and anatomic location.

Authors:  William J Anderst; Tyler West; William F Donaldson; Joon Y Lee
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2017-05-06       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 8.  Cervical pedicle screw guiding jig, an innovative solution.

Authors:  Abhishek Kashyap; Shreesh Kadur; Abhishek Mishra; Gaurang Agarwal; Abhay Meena; Lalit Maini
Journal:  J Clin Orthop Trauma       Date:  2018-07-17

9.  Preoperative imaging of cervical pedicles: comparison of accuracy of oblique radiographs versus axial CT scans.

Authors:  James P Sieradzki; Eldin E Karaikovic; Eugene P Lautenschlager; Martin L Lazarus
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2008-07-26       Impact factor: 3.134

10.  Cervical pedicle screw fixation: anatomic feasibility of pedicle morphology and radiologic evaluation of the anatomical measurements.

Authors:  Mohamed M Mohi Eldin
Journal:  Asian Spine J       Date:  2014-06-09
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.