Augmentation of occipitocervical contoured rod fixation with C1-C2 transarticular screws.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The technique of occipitocervical fusion using a threaded contoured rod attached with sublaminar wires to the occiput and upper cervical vertebrae is widely used throughout the world and has been clinically proven to provide effective fixation of the destabilized spine. However, this system has some disadvantages in maintaining stability, especially at C1-C2 because of the large amount of axial rotation at this level. In some clinical situations such as fracture of the C1 lamina, C1 laminectomy, and excessively lordotic curvature, it is not always possible to wire C1 directly into the construct. In such cases, combination of other stabilization methods that include C1 indirectly can be used to achieve a reliable posterior internal fixation. PURPOSE: Primarily, to evaluate whether a contoured rod construct in which C1 is indirectly included using C1-C2 transarticular screws is biomechanically equivalent to a standard, fully wired contoured rod construct. Secondarily, to evaluate the biomechanical benefit of adding C1-C2 transarticular screws to a fully wired contoured rod construct. STUDY DESIGN: Repeated-measures nondestructive in vitro biomechanical testing of destabilized cadaveric human occipitocervical spine specimens. METHODS: Six human cadaveric specimens from the occiput to C3 were studied. Angular and linear displacement data were recorded while nonconstraining nondestructive loads were applied. Three methods of fixation were tested: contoured rod incorporating C1 with and without transarticular screws and contoured rod with transarticular screws without incorporating C1. RESULTS: All three constructs reduced motion to well within normal range. In contoured rod constructs with C1 wired, addition of transarticular screws slightly but significantly improved stability. In constructs with transarticular screws, incorporation of C1 into the contoured rod wiring did not improve stability significantly. CONCLUSIONS: Adding C1-C2 transarticular screws to a wired contoured rod construct where C1 is included only slightly improves stability. As the absolute reduction in motion from adding transarticular screws is small (<1 degree), it is doubtful whether any enhanced fusion from this additional procedure outweighs the surgical risks. However, transarticular screws provide an effective alternate method to fixate C1 when the posterior arch of C1 is absent or has been fractured.     

Biomechanical comparison of five different atlantoaxial posterior fixation techniques

STUDY DESIGN: Five different reconstructions of the atlantoaxial complex were biomechanically compared in vitro in a nondestructive test. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether non-bone graft-dependent one-point fixation affords stability levels equivalent to three-point reconstructions. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Previous investigations have demonstrated that three-point fixation, using bilateral transarticular screws in combination with posterior wiring, provide the most effective resistance to minimize motion around C1-C2. However, placement of transarticular screws is technically demanding. Posterior wiring techniques affording one-point fixation have failure rates of approximately 15%, with failure considered to be secondary to structural bone graft failures. One-point, non-bone graft-dependent fixations have not been tested. METHODS: Eight human cervical specimens, C0-C3 were loaded nondestructively. Unconstrained three-dimensional segmental motion was measured. The reconstructions tested were two one-point fixations, one two-point fixation, and two three-point fixations. RESULTS: Under axial rotation two and three-point reconstructions provided better stiffness than the one-point reconstructions (P < 0.05). During flexion-extension, higher stiffness levels were observed in one- and three-point fixations when compared with the intact spine (P < 0.05). In lateral bending no significant differences were observed among the six groups, although the trend was that reconstructions including transarticular screws provided greater stability than one-point fixations. CONCLUSION: The current findings substantiate the use of three-point fixation as the treatment of choice for C1-C2 instability. [l: atlantoaxial fixation, biomechanics, cervical spine, instability, spinal instrumentation, transarticular screws]     

Biomechanical comparison of occipitoatlantal screw fixation techniques

OBJECT: The stability provided by 3 occipitoatlantal fixation techniques (occiput [Oc]-C1 transarticular screws, occipital keel screws rigidly interconnected with C-1 lateral mass screws, and suboccipital/sublaminar wired contoured rod) were compared. METHODS: Seven human cadaveric specimens received transarticular screws and 7 received occipital keel-C1 lateral mass screws. All specimens later underwent contoured rod fixation. All conditions were studied with and without placement of a structural graft wired between the skull base and C-1 lamina. Specimens were loaded quasistatically using pure moments to induce flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation while recording segmental motion optoelectronically. Flexibility was measured immediately postoperatively and after 10,000 cycles of fatigue. RESULTS: Application of Oc-C1 transarticular screws, with a wired graft, reduced the mean range of motion (ROM) to 3% of normal. Occipital keel-C1 lateral mass screws (also with graft) offered less stability than transarticular screws during extension and lateral bending (p < 0.02), reducing ROM to 17% of normal. The wired contoured rod reduced motion to 31% of normal, providing significantly less stability than either screw fixation technique. Fatigue increased motion in constructs fitted with transarticular screws, keel screws/lateral mass screw constructs, and contoured wired rods, by means of 19, 5, and 26%, respectively. In all constructs, adding a structural graft significantly improved stability, but the extent depended on the loading direction. CONCLUSIONS: Assuming the presence of mild C1-2 instability, Oc-C1 transarticular screws and occipital keel-C1 lateral mass screws are approximately equivalent in performance for occipitoatlantal stabilization in promoting fusion. A posteriorly wired contoured rod is less likely to provide a good fusion environment because of less stabilizing potential and a greater likelihood of loosening with fatigue.     

The C1 claw device: a new instrument for C1-C2 fusion

A new fixation device for C1-C2 fusion is presented. It consists of a claw construct for the C1 arch that is rigidly attached to C1-C2 transarticular screws to form an instrument that combines anterior and posterior fixation in the same construct. The new device was successfully applied in a case with failed C1-C2 fusion that was initially stabilized with transarticular screws alone, where the usual posterior wiring was omitted due to a defect of the posterior C1 arch.     

A biomechanical study of unilateral posterior atlantoaxial transarticular screw fixation

The purpose of this study was to investigate the fixation of C1-C2 instability with the use of a unilateral screw. Transarticular screw placement across C1-C2 may be contra-indicated in up to 20% of specimens on at least one side because of anatomic variations or other pathological processes. Hence the current study looks into unilateral screw fixation of C1- C2 instability. Eight cervical spine specimens, C1 through C5, were harvested from fresh human cadavers (4 male and 4 female) of average age 67 years (54-80). C1 and C2-C5 vertebrae were potted to allow motion only at the C1-C2 articulation. Cutting the transverse ligament on both sides of the odontoid and the tectorial membrane destabilized the specimens. Transarticular screw fixation of C1-C2 was performed in a manner similar to the technique described by Magerl. The stability was tested after fixation with one transarticular screw together with a posterior graft and wire. Placement of the screw was randomized, resulting in half the specimens receiving screws on the right side and the remaining half on the left side. The stiffness of the C1-C2 articulation was tested in rotation, lateral bending, flexion, and anterior translation in random order. The rotational stiffness was 1.44 +/- 0.44 N-m/deg, while lateral bending stiffness values were 2.33 +/- 1.14 N-m/mm (right bending) and 2.81 +/- 1.36 N-m/mm (left bending). The stiffness value in flexion was 0.813 +/- 0.189 N-m/mm and in translation 67.1 +/- 25.1 N/m. It was found that stability after unilateral transarticular screw fixation was less than that previously reported after bilateral transarticular screw fixation, but similar to that found with modified Brooks posterior wiring, which has been shown to provide better stability than other posterior wiring methods, and fusion rates of 96% have been reported. We concluded that C1-C2 unilateral posterior transarticular screw fixation with supplemental posterior graft and wiring would confer adequate stability in cases where bilateral screw placement is contraindicated.     

枕颈部后路不同内固定的生物力学比较

目的评价不同内固定重建枕颈部稳定性的生物力学性能。方法12具新鲜人体枕颈部标本,在标本完整、枕寰枢不稳、枕颈部植骨块钛缆固定(A组)、枕颈部经关节螺钉内固定(B组)、SUM-MIT枕颈部内固定系统固定(C组)五种状态下,依次用脊柱三维运动测量系统测试其OcC1、C1,2节段的运动参数。同时对固定后的OcC1经关节螺钉(OcC1TA组)、C1,2经关节螺钉(C1,2TA组)、枢椎椎弓螺钉(C2IS组)和枕骨螺钉(Oc Screw组)在生理载荷下三维六自由度运动时,运用电测法测定四种螺钉的拔出应力,并行统计学分析。结果在OcC1节段,B组在屈伸运动中的运动范围和中性区显著大于C组。在侧屈和旋转运动中,A组的运动范围和中性区均明显大于B、C组。在C1,2节段,B组各方向运动的运动范围和中性区均明显小于A组。B组在旋转运动中的运动范围和中性区均显著小于C组。电测法结果显示,侧屈状态下所有螺钉局部应变均接近0;前屈和旋转时螺钉承受不同程度的拉应力,后伸时螺钉承受压应力。Oc Screw组在屈伸和旋转运动状态下,所承受的任何载荷应力均大于其他三种置钉方法。结论枕颈部后路经关节螺钉内固定和SUMMIT枕颈内固定在控制旋转和侧屈的稳定性上有优点。枕骨螺钉承受的拉应力最大,生理环境下枕骨螺钉可能更易发生松动和断裂。     

经寰枢关节间隙螺钉和寰椎椎板钩内固定的力学稳定性

目的评价双侧经寰枢关节间隙螺钉和寰椎椎板钩内固定的力学稳定性。方法将6具新鲜尸体颈椎标本（包括枕骨基底部和C1-C4颈椎节段）置于1．5Nm载荷下，测量C1，2节段的三维运动范围（range of motion，ROM）。标本依Gallie内固定、双侧经寰枢关节间隙螺钉和Gallie内固定、双侧经寰枢关节间隙螺钉内固定、双侧经寰枢关节间隙螺钉和寰椎椎板钩内固定、双侧寰椎侧块螺钉和枢椎椎弓根螺钉内固定的顺序实施固定，每次固定后测量三维运动范围。结果包含经寰枢关节间隙螺钉的内固定组在旋转和侧屈方向上具有最小的ROM，其中双侧经寰枢关节间隙螺钉和寰椎椎板钩内固定组在屈伸运动方向上也具有最小的ROM。寰椎侧块螺钉和枢椎椎弓根螺钉内固定组在旋转方向上ROM大于单纯经寰枢关节间隙螺钉内固定组，但在侧屈和屈伸方向上接近经寰枢关节间隙螺钉，差异无统计学意义；其在侧屈和旋转方向上ROM均小于Gallie内固定组，差异有统计学意义。结论双侧经寰枢关节间隙螺钉和寰椎椎板钩“三点”内固定具有最强的生物力学稳定性。虽然双侧寰椎侧块螺钉和枢椎椎弓根螺钉内固定在生物力学稳定性上不及“三点”内固定，但明显优于Gallie内固定。     

枢椎棘突螺钉单侧应用联合对侧椎弓根螺钉固定的有限元分析

目的分析枢椎棘突螺钉单侧应用联合对侧椎弓根螺钉固定在寰枢和枕颈固定中的生物力学稳定性。方法构建正常枢椎解剖、椎板薄和椎动脉变异椎弓根细小3种不同解剖状态下的完整上部颈椎有限元模型作为完整模型组,然后分别模拟齿状突骨折进行寰枢固定和寰椎骨折进行枕颈固定。在寰枢固定中,比较单侧枢椎棘突螺钉+对侧椎弓根螺钉+双侧寰椎侧块螺钉固定组(棘突螺钉组)和枢椎双侧椎弓根螺钉+双侧寰椎侧块螺钉固定组(椎弓根螺钉组);在枕颈固定中,比较单侧枢椎棘突螺钉+对侧椎弓根螺钉+枕骨螺钉固定组(棘突螺钉组)和枢椎双侧椎弓根螺钉+枕骨螺钉固定组(椎弓根螺钉组)。枢椎棘突螺钉分别测试水平、斜向、垂直置钉3种不同的固定技术。模拟颈椎运动,测量枕颈的屈伸、侧屈、旋转的关节活动范围(ROM)。结果在寰枢和枕颈固定中,棘突螺钉组和椎弓根螺钉组的C1~C2屈伸、侧屈、旋转ROM均较完整模型组均明显下降。在寰枢固定中棘突螺钉组C0~C2屈伸、侧屈、旋转的ROM大于椎弓根螺钉组;在枕颈固定中,棘突螺钉组C1~C2侧屈的ROM大于椎弓根螺钉组,棘突螺钉组的C0~C2旋转的ROM大于椎弓根螺钉组。枢椎棘突螺钉分别测试水平、斜向、垂直固定间有差异,但不明显。结论在寰枢和枕颈固定中,枢椎双侧椎弓根螺钉固定和枢椎单侧棘突螺钉联合对侧椎弓根螺钉组合式固定方法均具有良好的稳定性。在寰枢固定中,相对于枢椎棘突螺钉组合式固定,枢椎双侧椎弓根螺钉固定具有更好的寰枢稳定性。在枕颈固定中,枢椎双侧椎弓根螺钉固定在侧屈和旋转活动上较枢椎棘突螺钉组合式固定稳定性更好。枢椎三种棘突螺钉置钉技术间的稳定性差异并不明显。     

Biomechanical evaluation of a new fixation device for the thoracic spine

The technology used in surgery for spinal deformity has progressed rapidly in recent years. Commonly used fixation techniques may include monofilament wires, sublaminar wires and cables, and pedicle screws. Unfortunately, neurological complications can occur with all of these, compromising the patients’ health and quality of life. Recently, an alternative fixation technique using a metal clamp and polyester belt was developed to replace hooks and sublaminar wiring in scoliosis surgery. The goal of this study was to compare the pull-out strength of this new construct with sublaminar wiring, laminar hooks and pedicle screws. Forty thoracic vertebrae from five fresh frozen human thoracic spines (T5–12) were divided into five groups (8 per group), such that BMD values, pedicle diameter, and vertebral levels were equally distributed. They were then potted in polymethylmethacrylate and anchored with metal screws and polyethylene bands. One of five fixation methods was applied to the right side of the vertebra in each group: Pedicle screw, sublaminar belt with clamp, figure-8 belt with clamp, sublaminar wire, or laminar hook. Pull-out strength was then assessed using a custom jig in a servohydraulic tester. The mean failure load of the pedicle screw group was significantly larger than that of the figure-8 clamp (P = 0.001), sublaminar belt (0.0172), and sublaminar wire groups (P = 0.04) with no significant difference in pull-out strength between the latter three constructs. The most common mode of failure was the fracture of the pedicle. BMD was significantly correlated with failure load only in the figure-8 clamp and pedicle screw constructs. Only the pedicle screw had a statistically significant higher failure load than the sublaminar clamp. The sublaminar method of applying the belt and clamp device was superior to the figure-8 method. The sublaminar belt and clamp construct compared favorably to the traditional methods of sublaminar wires and laminar hooks, and should be considered as an alternative fixation device in the thoracic spine.     

Atlantoaxial fusion using anterior transarticular screw fixation of C1–C2: technical innovation and biomechanical study

This study is an attempt to describe a new technique for anterior transarticular screw fixation of the atlantoaxial joints, and to compare the stability of this construct to posterior transarticular screw fixation with and without laminar cerclage wiring. Nine human cadaveric specimens were included in this study. The C1–C2 motion segment was instrumented using either anterior transarticular screws (group 1), posterior transarticular screws alone (group 2), or posterior screws with interlaminar cerclage wires (group 3). Using an unconstrained mechanical testing machine, the specimens were tested in rotation, lateral bending, and flexion-extension using nondestructive loads of ±2 N m. The specimens were also tested in translation using nondestructive loads of ±100 N. All values for the three groups with regards to anterior-posterior displacement, rotation, and lateral bending were similar as determined using a Kruskal–Wallis rank sum test with a significance level of p<0.05. The only significant difference was registered in flexion-extension where the cerclage wire added some strength to the construct. Anterior transarticular screw fixation of the atlantoaxial spine has several advantages over posterior fixation techniques, and is as stable as posterior transarticular fixation in all clinically significant planes of motion. The addition of posterior interlaminar cerclage wiring further improves resistance to flexion-extension forces. Anterior transarticular screw fixation of the atlantoaxial joint is a useful technique for achieving C1–C2 stabilization.     

寰枢椎后路椎弓根螺钉固定的生物力学评价

目的：评价寰枢椎后路椎弓根螺钉固定的生物力学稳定性。方法：6具新鲜颈椎标本，按随机顺序，对每一标本先后行C1-C2椎弓根螺钉、Magerl螺钉、Brooks钢丝以及螺钉联合钢丝固定，在脊柱三维运动实验机上测量其三维运动范围。结果：Magerl螺钉或C1-C2椎弓根螺钉联合Brooks钢丝组成的固定系统的三维运动范围最小。C1-C2椎弓根螺钉固定的前后屈伸运动范围与Brooks钢丝固定无差异，但大于Magerl螺钉；其左右侧屈运动范围小于Brooks钢丝固定，大于Magerl螺钉；其轴向旋转角度明显小于Brooks钢丝固定，但与Magerl螺钉无统计学差异。结论：C1-C2椎弓根螺钉的三维稳定性与Magerl螺钉相当，联合Brooks钢丝固定可进一步提高其稳定性。     

寰椎椎板钩联合枢椎椎弓根螺钉内固定的力学稳定性评价

目的 评价寰椎椎板钩联合枢椎椎弓根螺钉内固定的生物力学稳定性.方法 取6具新鲜尸体颈椎标本置于1.5 N·m载荷下,测量C_(1-2)节段的三维运动范围(ROM).标本按随机顺序,依次行完整状态(完整状态组)、不稳状态(齿状突周围韧带切除,为不稳状态组)、经寰枢关节间隙螺钉联合Gallic内固定(固定A组)、寰椎椎板钩联合枢椎椎弓根螺钉内固定(固定B组)、寰枢椎椎弓根螺钉内固定(固定C组)5种状态下的三维ROM值测量.比较各组标本的屈伸、侧屈、旋转ROM值.结果 完整状态组、不稳状态组、固定A、B、C组的平均屈伸ROM值分别为17.78°、30.69°、2.25°、2.93°、2.73°,组间比较差异有统计学意义(F=216.69,P=0.000);平均侧屈ROM值分别为9.56°、17.18°、1.91°、2.30°、2.05°,组间比较差异有统计学意义(F=122.75,P=0.000);平均旋转ROM值分别为44.19°、57.30°、1.22°、2.88°、2.07°,组间比较差异有统计学意义(F=154.54,P=0.000).固定A、B、C组较完整状态组和不稳状态组各个方向的ROM值均明显减少,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05),但固定A、B、C组之间符个方向的ROM值比较差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05).结论 寰椎椎板钩联合枢椎椎弓根螺钉内固定可提供与经寰枢关节间隙螺钉联合Gallic内固定和寰枢椎椎弓根螺钉内固定相当的力学稳定性.在以上两种方法无法实施时,可作为一种安全的替代.     

Transarticular screw fixation for atlanto-occipital dislocation

STUDY DESIGN: A case report of traumatic atlanto-occipital dislocation managed by transarticular screw fixation. OBJECTIVES: To present a case with initial failed wire fixation but successful reduction and fixation with transarticular screw fixation and occipitocervical plate stabilization. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Atlanto-occipital dislocation is generally a fatal injury, except when it occurs in children. Management of this injury is difficult because of multidirectional instability and the problems associated with technical stabilization. METHODS: Intraoperative atlanto-occipital reduction was achieved and maintained by direct C0-C1 transarticular screw fixation. To protect this fixation, a posterior occipitocervical fusion at C0-C2 using a Y-plate was performed. RESULTS: The internal fixation and reduction were maintained, indicating a good surgical outcome, at examination 2 years after surgery. The initially severe neurologic deficit was reduced to some motor weakness of the right hand and weakness of oculomotor function. CONCLUSIONS: Anatomic reduction and reliable fixation with transarticular screws may provide satisfactory clinical results with important neurologic recovery in cases of atlanto-occipital dislocation.     

Translaminar screws in the atlas

STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective review of a new surgical technique. OBJECTIVES: To describe a new method of fixation augmentation in posterior C1-C2 spondylodesis. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Posterior atlantoaxial spondylodesis using transarticular screws is often supplemented with sublaminar wires to enhance stability. This technique is not possible if the arch of C1 is deficient. A method of stabilizing the segment and the graft was developed, and the early results were reviewed. METHODS: Five patients with a deficient posterior arch of the atlas, who also needed atlantoaxial spondylodesis, were reviewed. In each patient, fixation was augmented with translaminar screws that attached the graft to the arch of C1. RESULTS: In all five patients, solid arthrodesis was achieved, and all had substantial relief of pain. There were no neurologic complications or failures of fixation. CONCLUSIONS: The method of fixation of graft to the atlas using translaminar screws is a safe and reasonable alternative to external halo immobilization or more extensive surgery, such as occiput to C2 fusion.     

Spine update: cervical spine internal fixation using screw and screw-plate constructs

Screw and screw-plate constructs have been used successfully in fixation of the cervical spine. This update focuses on the indications, complications, and nuances in the technique used for odontoid screws, transarticular C1-C2 screws, occipitocervical plating, posterior lateral mass screws, pedicle screws, and anterior plating.     

Posterior atlanto-axial fusion with the Olerud Cervical Fixation System for odontoid fractures and C1-C2 instability in rheumatoid arthritis

In posterior C1-C2 fusion, traditional wire fixation gives poor stability. The bone quality is often insufficient to provide the competent structural bone graft that is required, and the introduction of sublaminar wires is somewhat dangerous. The stability is markedly improved by adding transarticular screws, but the drawbacks of structural bone graft and sublaminar wires remain. The C1 claw of the Olerud Cervical Fixation System improves C1-C2 fixation without relying on structural bone graft or compromising the spinal canal. The aim of this study was to evaluate radiological healing and possible complications in a consecutive series of C1-C2 fusions from our department operated with the C1 claw device. Twenty-six patients (14 women) with a mean age of 73 (range 37-93) years were included. The diagnoses were odontoid fracture in 18 patients, rheumatoid instability in 6, and odontoid non-union and os odontoideum in 1 each. The patients were followed clinically and with plain radiographs for an average of 15 (range 3-27) months. There were no neurological or vascular complications, and no secondary displacements or reoperations in the series. Twenty patients followed for 6-27 months were radiographically healed. Six patients died from unrelated causes 1-38 months postoperatively. Three of these patients had no radiographs later than the postoperative control, one had a healed odontoid fracture but resorbed bone graft at 8 months, while the remaining two patients were not healed, but showed no signs of healing disturbance at the time of death. On the basis of the findings of this study, posterior C1-C2 fusion with the Olerud Cervical Fixation System seems promising. No serious complications related to the surgical procedure were encountered. The stability of the implant obviates the use of a solid bone block as a graft and still allows a high frequency of fusion healing.     

Atlantoaxial fusion: a biomechanical analysis of two C1–C2 fusion techniques

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Different atlantoaxial fusion techniques are used for instability. Transarticular screws are biomechanically superior to wiring techniques and equivalent to C1 lateral mass to C2 pedicle (C1LM-C2P) fixation. Recently, C1 lateral mass to C2 laminar (C1LM-C2L) fixation has been shown to have flexibility similar to C1LM-C2P fixation in flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation. PURPOSE: Compare the stiffness of C1LM-C2P with C1LM-C2L screw rod fixation. STUDY DESIGN: In vitro biomechanical study. OUTCOME MEASURES: Stiffness in flexion/extension, lateral bending, axial rotation, and anterior-posterior (AP) translation. METHODS: Eight fresh-frozen human cadaveric cervical spines (C1-C3) were tested intact and, after a type II odontoid fracture, were instrumented and tested with two fixation constructs: C1LM-C2P screws and C1LM-C2L screws. The testing involved flexion, extension, lateral bending, AP translation, and axial rotation. Stiffness was measured and compared with a repeated-measures analysis. RESULTS: C1LM-C2P was significantly stiffer than the intact in AP translation (p<.001), lateral bending (p=.001), and axial rotation (p=.002) and equivalent in flexion/extension (p=.09). C1LM-C2L was significantly stiffer than the intact in AP translation (p<.01) and axial rotation (p<.004) and equivalent in lateral bending (p<.71) and flexion/extension (p=.22). C1LM-C2P was stiffer than C1LM-C2L in right/left lateral bending (p<.001) and axial rotation (p=.009) and equivalent in AP translation (p=.06) and flexion/extension (p=.74). CONCLUSION: C1LM-C2P fixation is equivalent to C1LM-C2L fixation in flexion/extension and AP translation and superior in lateral bending and axial rotation.     

Posterior C1-C2 fusion with polyaxial screw and rod fixation.

STUDY DESIGN: A novel technique of atlantoaxial stabilization using individual fixation of the C1 lateral mass and the C2 pedicle with minipolyaxial screws and rods is described. In addition, the initial results of this technique on 37 patients are described. OBJECTIVES: To describe the technique and the initial clinical and radiographic results for posterior C1-C2 fixation with a new implant system. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Stabilization of the atlantoaxial complex is a challenging procedure because of the unique anatomy of this region. Fixation by transarticular screws combined with posterior wiring and structural bone grafting leads to excellent fusion rates. The technique is technically demanding and has a potential risk of injury to the vertebral artery. In addition, this procedure cannot be used in the presence of fixed subluxation of C1 on C2 and in the case of an aberrant path of the vertebral artery. To address these limitations, a new technique of C1-C2 fixation has been developed: bilateral insertion of polyaxial-head screws in the lateral mass of C1 and through the pars interarticularis into the pedicle of C2, followed by a fluoroscopically controlled reduction maneuver and rod fixation. METHODS: After posterior exposure of the C1-C2 complex, the 3.5-mm polyaxial screws are inserted in the lateral masses of C1. Two polyaxial screws are then inserted into the pars interarticularis of C2. Drilling is guided by anatomic landmarks and fluoroscopy. If necessary, reduction of C1 onto C2 can be accomplished by manipulation of the implants, followed by fixation to the 3-mm rod. For definitive fusion, cancellous bone can be added. No structural bone graft or wiring is required. In selected cases, e.g., C1-C2 subluxation or fractures in young patients in whom only temporary fixation is necessary, the instrumentation can be removed after an appropriate time. Because the joint surfaces stay intact, the patient can regain motion in the C1-C2 joints. RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients underwent this procedure. No neural or vascular damage related to this technique has been observed. The early clinical and radiologic follow-up data indicate solid fusion in all patients. CONCLUSION: Fixation of the atlantoaxial complex using polyaxial-head screws and rods seems to be a reliable technique and should be considered an efficient alternative to the previously reported techniques.     

枕寰枢复合体后路螺钉固定技术的应变电测研究

目的比较4种植入方式的枕颈部螺钉在施加生理载荷时所承受的拔出应力,评价其各自在生理环境中的机械性能。方法对12具新鲜人体枕颈部标本(含Oc~C3),依次采用后路经关节螺钉固定和SUMMIT枕颈部内固定系统固定。对固定后的Oc-C1经关节螺钉(Oc-C1组)、C1,2经关节螺钉(C1,2组)、枢椎椎弓螺钉(C2IS组)和枕骨螺钉(OcScrew组)在生理载荷下三维六自由度运动时,运用电测法进行应变电阻测定4种螺钉的拔出应力,并对结果进行统计处理。结果侧屈状态下,电测法测得的所有螺钉局部应变均接近于0。在前屈、后伸、左旋和右旋运动时,随着加载载荷增大,测得的应力均逐步增大。在前屈和旋转时,螺钉均承受不同程度拉伸应力;在后伸时,螺钉所受的力均为压应力。枕骨螺钉(OcScrew组)在屈伸和旋转运动状态下,在所有3种载荷下所承受的应力均大于其它3种植钉方法,存在统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论枕骨螺钉承受的拔出应力最大,生理环境下枕骨螺钉可能更易出现内植物相关并发症,具体应用时应结合临床实际。     

Biomechanical study of atlantoaxial arthrodesis: transarticular screw fixation versus modified Brooks posterior wiring.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the present study was to compare the biomechanical stability of C1 and C2 vertebrae after treatment of ligamentous instability by either modified Brooks posterior wiring (MB) or transarticular screw (TAS) techniques. We hypothesized that the TAS technique would be more stable because of direct fixation through the facet joints. STUDY DESIGN: We studied the in vitro stability (arthrodesis) of TAS fixation of C1 and C2 versus that of MB. TAS fixation involves placing screws across the facets from posteriorly at C2 to the anterior surface of C1, plus a bone graft and posterior wiring of C1 and C2. METHODS: Cervical spines from nine individuals with an average age of sixty-two years (range 51 to 71 years) were harvested from cadavers (six male, three female). C1 and the segment from C2 to C5 were potted to allow motion only at the C1-C2 articulation. The specimens were destabilized by cutting the transverse ligament on both sides of the odontoid and the tectorial membrane between C1 and C2. The MB and TAS techniques were performed by methods similar to those described in the literature. The stiffness of the C1-C2 articulation of each specimen was tested under rotation, lateral bending, flexion, and anterior translation in random order. Intact and destabilized specimens fixed with either MB or TAS were tested in sequence. RESULTS: Significantly higher stiffness values in the elastic zone were obtained with the TAS technique than with the MB technique for all modes of testing (p < 0.002, t test). Values for the neutral zone (the region where minimal loads produce displacement) were not significantly different between the MB and TAS techniques (p > 0.1, t test). CONCLUSION: We conclude that stability is significantly enhanced by use of the TAS construct for treatment of ligamentous instability at the atlantoaxial joint for all motions tested in the present study.