New means in spinal pedicle hook fixation

Summary Pedicle hooks which are used as an anchorage for posterior spinal instrumentation may be subjected to considerable three-dimensional forces. In order to achieve stronger attachment to the implantation site, hooks using screws for additional fixation have been developed. The failure loads and mechanisms of three such devices have been experimentally determined on human thoracic vertebrae: the Universal Spine System (USS) pedicle hook with one screw, a prototype pedicle hook with two screws and the Cotrel-Dubousset (CD) pedicle hook with screw. The USS hooks use 3.2-mm self-tapping fixation screws which pass into the pedicle, whereas the CD hook is stabilised with a 3-mm set screw pressing against the superior part of the facet joint. A clinically established 5-mm pedicle screw was tested for comparison. A matched pair experimental design was implemented to evauluate these implants in constrained (series I) and rotationally unconstrained (series II) posterior pull-out tests. In the constrained tests the pedicle screw was the strongest implant, with an average pull-out force of 1650 N (SD 623 N). The prototype hook was comparable, with an average failure load of 1530 N (SD 414 N). The average pull-out force of the USS hook with one screw was 910 N (SD 243 N), not significantly different to the CD hook's average failure load of 740 N (SD 189 N). The result of the unconstrained tests were similar, with the prototype hook being the strongest device (average 1617 N, SD 652 N). However, in this series the difference in failure load between the USS hook with one screw and the CD hook was significant. Average failure loads of 792 N (SD 184 N) for the USS hook and 464 N (SD 279 N) for the CD hook were measured. A pedicular fracture in the plane of the fixation screw was the most common failure mode for USS hooks. The hooks usually did not move from their site of implantation, suggesting that they may be well-suited for the socalled segmental spinal correction technique as used in scoliosis surgery. In contrast, the CD hook disengaged by translating caudally from its site of implantation in all cases, suggesting a mechanical instability. The differences in observed hook failure modes may be a function of the type and number of additional fixation screws used. These results suggest that additional screw fixation allows stable attachment of pedicle hooks to their implantation site. Hooks using additional fixation screws passing obliquely into the pedicle apparently provide the most rigid attachment. The second fixation screw of the prototype hook almost doubles the fixation strength. Thus, the prototype hook might be considered as an alternative to the pepdicle screw, especially in the upper thoracic region.     

Pullout strength of pedicle screws versus pedicle and laminar hooks in the thoracic spine

While the biomechanical properties of pedicle screws have proven to be superior in the lumbar spine, little is known concerning pullout strength of pedicle screws in comparison to hooks in the thoracic spine. In vitro biomechanical pullout testing was performed to evaluate the axial pullout strength of pedicle screws versus pedicle and laminar hooks in the thoracic spine with regard to surgical correction techniques in scoliosis. Nine human cadaveric thoracic spines were harvested and disarticulated. To simulate a typical posterior segmental scoliosis instrumentation, standard pedicle hooks were used between T4 and T8 and supralaminar hooks between T9 and T12 and tested against pedicle screws. The pedicle screws were loaded strictly longitudinal to their axis; the hooks were loaded perpendicular to the intended rod direction. In total, 90 pullout tests were performed. Average pullout strength of the pedicle screws was significantly higher than in the hook group (T4-T8: 531 N versus 321 N, T9-T12: 807 N versus 600 N, p < 0.05). Both screw diameter and the bone mineral density (BMD) had significant influence on the pullout strength in the screw group. For scoliosis correction, pedicle screws might be beneficial, especially for rigid thoracic curves, since they are significantly more resistant to axial pullout than both pedicle and laminar hooks.     

Dorsale operative Korrektur der idiopathischen Skoliose

Posterior correction and fusion of scoliosis with multisegmental instrumentation systems was developed by Cotrel-Dubousset in the 1980s. Initially correction and instrumentation was performed using hooks only. Later pedicle screws were implemented first for the lumbar and then for the thoracic spine. Nowadays instrumentation based on pedicle screws only is well established for posterior scoliosis surgery. Biomechanical studies demonstrated higher pull-out forces for pedicle than for hook constructs. In clinical studies several authors reported better Cobb angle correction of the primary and the secondary curves and less loss of correction in pedicle screw versus hook instrumentations. Furthermore, pedicle screw instrumentation allows fewer segments to be fused, especially caudally, and thus saving mobile segments. In most of these publications there were no differences in operation time, blood loss and complication rates. In summary, there is better curve correction without an increased risk using multisegmental pedicle screw instrumentation in modern posterior scoliosis surgery.     

Pull-out strength of the suprapedicle claw construct: a biomechanical study

The pull-out of the superior screw is a well recognized problem in anterior instrumentation of the spine for scoliosis. A biomechanical pull-out study of anterior vertebral body screw in cadaveric thoracic spine was therefore designed to investigate and compare the pull-out strength of three different anterior vertebral body fixations using the AO Universal Spine System: simple bicortical screw, bicortical screw with an opposite washer (sometimes called pull-out resistant nut), and a new construct made of a bicortical screw with the addition of a suprapedicular hook on the same vertebra (or claw construct). The T4 to T9 vertebral bodies from six human cadavers (total of 36 specimens) were instrumented with three different instrumentation constructs after measuring the bone mineral density of each individual vertebra. After stabilization of the vertebral bodies, the screws were extracted employing a material testing system using axial pull-out. The maximum axial forces were recorded at the time of the construct failure. The mean ultimate fixation strength (UFS) values after being adjusted for bone mineral density and vertebral body diameter were 631, 711, and 1244 N for the three different constructs, respectively (screw alone, screw with an opposite washer, and screw with a suprapedicle claw). The difference in UFS was not significant for the first two constructs tested (screw alone and screw with an opposite washer). However, the difference in ultimate fixation strength between the claw and the other constructs was highly significant (P<0.0001). Specimens with low BMD did not benefit as much from claw construct as the ones did with a normal BMD. The failure mode of each construct was described, but was in neither case judged dangerous for the spinal cord. This study shows that the suprapedicle claw construct improves the pull-out strength of an anterior vertebral body screw by 80%, and changes the mode of failure so as not to rely only on the screw characteristics or solely on the vertebral body. By adding a suprapedicle hook in a claw configuration, one may prevent superior screw pull-out in anterior spine surgery for scoliosis.     

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.     

Pull-out strength of pedicle hooks with fixation screws: influence of screw length and angulation

The pull-out force of thoracic spinal pedicle hooks secured by long fixation screws engaging the posterior portion of the vertebral endplate was measured. The perfomance of these hooks was compared with that of hooks using a shorter screw and different screw orientation such that the vertebral endplates were not perforated. The longer and differently angulated screws, engaging the endplate, significantly enhanced the fixation potential of the hooks.     

Biomechanical comparison of two-level cervical locking posterior screw/rod and hook/rod techniques.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Locking posterior instrumentation in the cervical spine can be attached using 1) pedicle screws, 2) lateral mass screws, or 3) laminar hooks. This order of options is in order of decreasing technical difficulty and decreasing depth of fixation, and is thought to be in order of decreasing stability. PURPOSE: We sought to determine whether substantially different biomechanical stability can be achieved in a two-level construct using pedicle screws, lateral mass screws, or laminar hooks. Secondarily, we sought to quantify the differential and additional stability provided by an anterior plate. STUDY DESIGN: In vitro biomechanical flexibility experiment comparing three different posterior constructs for stabilizing the cervical spine after three-column injury. METHODS: Twenty-one human cadaveric cervical spines were divided into three groups. Group 1 received lateral mass screws at C5 and C6 and pedicle screws at C7; Group 2 received lateral mass screws at C5 and C6 and laminar hooks at C7; Group 3 received pedicle screws at C5, C6, and C7. Specimens were nondestructively tested intact, after a three-column two-level injury, after posterior C5-C7 rod fixation, after two-level discectomy and anterior plating, and after removing posterior fixation. Angular motion was recorded during flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation. Posterior hardware was subsequently failed by dorsal loading. RESULTS: Laminar hooks performed well in resisting flexion and extension but were less effective in resisting lateral bending and axial rotation, allowing greater range of motion (ROM) than screw constructs and allowing a significantly greater percentage of the two-level ROM to occur across the hook level than the screw level (p<.03). Adding an anterior plate significantly improved stability in all three groups. With combined hardware, Group 3 resisted axial rotation significantly worse than the other groups. Posterior instrumentation resisted lateral bending significantly better than anterior plating in all groups (p<.04) and resisted flexion and axial rotation significantly better than anterior plating in most cases. Standard deviation of the ROM was greater with anterior than with posterior fixation. There was no significant difference among groups in resistance to failure (p=.74). CONCLUSIONS: Individual pedicle screws are known to outperform lateral mass screws in terms of pullout resistance, but they offered no apparent advantage in terms of construct stability or failure of whole constructs. Larger standard deviations in anterior fixation imply more variability in the quality of fixation. In most loading modes, laminar hooks provided similar stability to lateral mass screws or pedicle screws; caudal laminar hooks are therefore an acceptable alternative posteriorly. Posterior two-level fixation is less variable and slightly more stable than anterior fixation. Combined instrumentation is significantly more stable than either anterior or posterior alone.     

The USS pedicle hook system: a morphometric analysis of its safety in the thoracic spine. Universal Spine System.

The Universal Spine System (USS) pedicle hook design includes a fixation screw that passes obliquely in the anterocranial direction in the pedicle. The addition of the fixation screw was to address concerns with rotation of the hook and hook disengagement. This study was designed to evaluate the safety of the USS screw locked pedicle hook. Eleven cadaveric thoracic spines were instrumented posteriorly with USS pedicle hooks from T1 to T12. Spinal instrumentation was performed by a spinal surgeon experienced with the USS system. Spinal deformity was created prior to instrumentation, ranging from 0 to 55 degrees in the horizontal plane (rotation) and from 0 to 50 degrees in the frontal plane (scoliosis). Radiographs, computed tomography (CT), and segmental dissection were used for data acquisition. Morphometric CT analysis before instrumentation demonstrated that the transverse pedicular diameter was the smallest at T5 with a mean of 3.7 mm. The transverse pedicular angle (TPA) was found to always point toward the midline. The largest TPA was observed at T1 with a mean TPA of 28.4 degrees. The pedicle with the least angular deviation from the midline was T11 with a mean TPA of 7 degrees. Postinstrumentation CT analysis and segmental dissection revealed perforations of the pedicle cortex by the fixation screw in 15% of instrumented pedicles (26/172). There were 6 medial and 20 lateral perforations. Medial perforations occurred exclusively in the three most proximal spinal segments, whereas the lateral perforations occurred throughout the thoracic spine. The mean encroachment of the fixation screw was 1.67 mm medially and 1.95 mm laterally. This study demonstrates the variation in caliber and direction of the thoracic pedicles. Medial and lateral perforations of the pedicle can occur with the USS pedicle hook instrumented system.     

下颈椎后路3种固定技术的拔出强度研究

目的评价下颈椎后路侧块螺钉、椎弓根螺钉、经关节螺钉3种固定方法的拔出强度。方法6具新鲜颈椎尸体标本（C3～C7）,分别用侧块螺钉Roy-Camille法（LMS）、椎弓根螺钉（TPS）和经关节螺钉植入法（TAS）拧入螺钉,使用万能材料实验机,以100、200、300、400、500、600N分级加载,以18mm/min加载速度进行螺钉拔出实验,测试其最大拔出力、最大拔出能量。结果LMS最大拔出力为（426±38）N,最大拔出能量为（5.26±0.39）J;TPS最大拔出力为（502±42）N,最大拔出能量为（7.18±0.67）J;TAS最大拔出力为（482±40）N,最大拔出能量为（6.68±0.47）J。LMS的最大拔出力和最大拔出能量均小于TPS和TAS（P〈0.05）,而TPS和TAS之间相近,差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）。结论经关节螺钉拔出强度优于侧块螺钉,而椎弓根螺钉拔出强度最大。     

Comparative analysis of pedicle screw and hook instrumentation in posterior correction and fusion of idiopathic thoracic scoliosis

Posterior correction and fusion with segmental hook instrumentation represent the gold standard in the surgical treatment of progressive idiopathic thoracic scoliosis. However, there is a debate over whether pedicle screws are safe in scoliosis surgery and whether their usage might enable a better curve correction and a shorter fusion length. The details of curve correction, fusion length and complication rate of 99 patients with idiopathic thoracic scoliosis treated with either hook or pedicle screw instrumentation were analyzed. Forty-nine patients had been operated with the Cotrel-Dubousset system using hooks exclusively ("hook group"). Fifty patients had been operated with either a combination of pedicle screws in the lumbar and lower thoracic and hooks in the upper thoracic spine or exclusive pedicle screw instrumentation using the Münster Posterior Double Rod System ("screw group"). The preoperative Cobb angle averaged 61.3 degrees (range 40 degrees-84 degrees ) in the hook group and 62.5 degrees (range 43 degrees-94 degrees ) in the screw group. Average primary curve correction was 51.7% in the hook group and 55.8% in the screw group ( P>0.05). However, at follow-up (2-12 years later) primary curve correction was significantly greater ( P=0.001) in the screw group (at 50.1%) compared to the hook group (at 41.1%). Secondary lumbar curve correction was significantly greater ( P=0.04) in the screw group (54.9%) compared to the hook group (46.9%). Correction of the apical vertebral rotation according to Perdriolle was minimal in both groups. Apical vertebral translation was corrected by 42.0% in the hook group and 55.6% in the screw group ( P=0.008). Correction of the tilt of the lowest instrumented vertebra averaged 48.1% in the hook group and 66.2% in the screw group ( P=0.0004). There were no differences concerning correction of the sagittal plane deformity between the two groups. Fusion length was, on average, 0.6 segments shorter in the screw group compared to the hook group ( P=0.03). With pedicle screws, the lowest instrumented vertebra was usually one below the lower end vertebra, whereas in the hook group it was between one and two vertebrae below the lower end vertebra. Both operative time and intraoperative blood loss were significantly higher in the hook group ( P<0.0001). One pedicle screw at T5 was exchanged due to the direct proximity to the aorta. There were no neurologic complications related to pedicle screw instrumentation. Pedicle screw instrumentation alone or in combination with proximal hook instrumentation offers a significantly better primary and secondary curve correction in idiopathic thoracic scoliosis and enables a significantly shorter fusion length.     

Biomechanical evaluation of pedicle screws versus pedicle and laminar hooks in the thoracic spine.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Pedicle screws have been shown to be superior to hooks in the lumbar spine, but few studies have addressed their use in the thoracic spine. PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to biomechanically evaluate the pullout strength of pedicle screws in the thoracic spine and compare them to laminar hooks. STUDY DESING/SETTING: Twelve vertebrae (T1-T12) were harvested from each of five embalmed human cadavers (n=60). The age of the donors averaged 83+8.5 years. After bone mineral density had been measured in the vertebrae (mean=0.47 g/cm(3)), spines were disarticulated. Some pedicles were damaged during disarticulation or preparation for testing, so that 100 out of a possible 120 pullout tests were performed. METHODS: Each vertebra was secured using a custom-made jig, and a posteriorly directed force was applied to either the screw or the claw. Constructs were ramped to failure at 3 mm/min using a Mini Bionix II materials testing machine (MTS, Eden Prairie, MN). RESULTS: Pedicle claws had an average pullout strength of 577 N, whereas the pullout strength of pedicle screws averaged 309 N. Hooks installed using the claw method in the thoracic spine had an overwhelming advantage in pullout strength versus pedicle screws. Even in extremely osteoporotic bone, the claw withstood 88% greater pullout load. CONCLUSION: The results of this study indicate that hooks should be considered when supplemental instrumentation is required in thoracic vertebrae, especially in osteoporotic bone.     

Correlative analysis of the results of surgical treatment of thoracolumbar injuries with long Texas Scottish rite hospital construct: is the use of pedicle screws versus hooks advantageous in the lumbar spine?

This is a prospective, randomized study to compare the efficacy of two similar "long-segment" Texas Scottish Rite Hospital instrumentations with the use of hooks in the thoracic spine and pedicle screws versus laminar hook claw in the lumbar spine for thoracolumbar A3, B, and C injuries. Forty consecutive patients with such thoracolumbar fractures (T11-L1) associated with spinal canal encroachment underwent early operative postural reduction and stabilization. The patients were randomly sampled into two groups: Twenty patients received hooks in "claw configuration" in both the thoracic and the lumbar spine (group A), and 20 patients received hooks in the thoracic vertebrae and pedicle screws in the lumbar vertebrae (group B). Pre- and postoperative plain roentgenograms and computed tomography scans were used to evaluate any changes in Gardner post-traumatic kyphotic deformity, anterior and posterior vertebral body height at the fracture level, and spinal canal clearance (SCC). All patients were followed for an average period of 52 months (range 42-71 months). The correction of anterior vertebral body height was significantly more (P < 0.01) in the spines of group B (33%) than in group A (16%), with a subsequent 11% loss of correction at the latest evaluation in group A and no loss of correction in group B. There were no significant differences in the changes of posterior vertebral body height and Gardner angle between the two groups. The SCC was significantly more (P < 0.05) immediately postoperatively in the spine of group B (32%) than in group A (19%). In the latest evaluation, there was a 9% loss of the immediately postoperatively achieved SCC in group A, while SCC was furthermore increased at 10.5% in group B. All patients with incomplete neurologic lesions in groups A and B were postoperatively improved at 1.1 and 1.7 levels, respectively. There were two hook dislodgements in the thoracic spine, one in each group, while there was no screw failure in group B. There was neither pseudarthrosis nor neurologic deterioration following surgery. Visual Analog Pain Scale and Short Form-36 scores were equally improved and did not differ between the two groups. The use of pedicle screws in the lumbar spine to stabilize the lowermost end of a long rigid construct applied for A3, B, and C thoracolumbar injuries was advantageous when compared with that using hook claws in the lumbar spine because the constructs with screws restored and maintained the fractured anterior vertebral body height better than the hooks without subsequent loss of correction and safeguarded postoperatively a continuous SCC at the injury level.     

An internal fixator for posterior application to short segments of the thoracic, lumbar, or lumbosacral spine. Design and testing

A new spinal implant has been designed and biomechanical testing completed, intended for application to "short-segment" spinal defects such as disc degeneration, fracture, spondylolisthesis, or tumor. Major improvements over currently available devices include: only 2-3 vertebrae are spanned, not 5-7 as with Harrington rods; true three-dimensional fixation is achieved, preventing such problems as hook or rod dislocation; three-dimensional adjustment is easily accomplished, allowing fracture or spondylolisthesis reduction to be readily performed; attachment to vertebrae is by means of transpedicular screws eliminating deliberate encroachment into the spinal canal, such as Luque wires or Harrington hooks; no special alignment between screws is needed (such as with holes or slots in a plate), allowing screw placement to fully conform to anatomic structures; and laminectomy sites and lumbosacral junction are readily instrumented. Background investigations presented here for design of this device include: CT-defined pedicle morphometry showing that screws may be larger than those currently used; effect of pitch, minor diameter, and tooth profile on screw pull-out strength; mechanical testing of a compact, three-dimensionally adjustable, strong, nonloosening articulating clamp; and establishing of the relationship between depth of penetration and strength of fixation of transpeduncular screws.     

钉棒及钩棒系统治疗胸腰椎多节段脊柱骨折

目的评价钉棒及钩棒系统治疗胸腰椎多节段脊柱骨折的临床疗效。方法23例多节段胸腰椎骨折患者，后路切开复位，选择性椎管减压．钉棒或钩棒系统内固定及后外侧植骨融合进行手术治疗。其中相邻多节段型13例，非相邻多节段型8例，混合型2例。结果全组病例平均随访14个月，未发现内固定物松动、断离，无继发性脊柱后凸畸形加重。椎体高度由术前平均48．4％恢复至术后平均92．4%。2例完全性及11例不完全性脊髓损伤者．脊髓神经功能获改善。结论在椎管进行充分减压的基础上．钉棒及钩棒系统能有效复位椎体骨折，重建脊柱稳定性，是多节段胸腰椎不稳定性骨折合并脊髓神经损伤后路手术的理想选择。     

Segmental pedicle screw fixation or cross-links in multilevel lumbar constructs. a biomechanical analysis.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The placement of segmental pedicle screws and cross-links in short segment posterior pedicle screw constructs has been shown to increase the construct stiffness in some planes. To date, no studies have looked at the contributions of segmental pedicle screw and cross-link placement in longer constructs. PURPOSE: To evaluate the influence of segmental pedicle screw and/or cross-link placement on flexion/extension, lateral bending and axial torsion stiffness in two- and three-level posterior pedicle screw fixation constructs. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: An in vitro biomechanical analysis of two- and three-level posterior pedicle screw constructs with and without segmental fixation and/or cross-links was performed using calf lumbar spines. Stiffness of the constructs was compared. METHODS: Six calf lumbar specimens were used to test stiffness in one-, two- and three-level posterior pedicle screw fixation constructs in 12 configurations. A custom-made, four-axis spine simulator applied pure cyclical (+/-5 Nm) flexion/extension, lateral bending and axial torsion moments at 0.1 Hz under a constant 50-N axial compressive load. The stiffness of each construct was calculated about each axis of rotation. Data were analyzed using nonparametric techniques with statistical significance determined at alpha less than .05. RESULTS: The stiffness of the instrumented spines were significantly greater than the noninstrumented intact spines in all loading conditions for one-, two- and three-level constructs. There were no significant changes in flexion/extension stiffness with the addition of either the cross-links or the segmental pedicle screws. In lateral bending, the addition of segmental pedicle screws significantly increased the stiffness in the two- and three-level constructs. The addition of two cross-links increased lateral bending stiffness in the longer three-level constructs, with little change in the two-level constructs. In axial torsion, the progressive addition of cross-links showed a tendency toward increased stiffness in both the two- and three-level constructs. Segmental pedicle screws further increased torsional stiffness of the longer, three-level constructs. CONCLUSIONS: As the use of segmental spinal instrumentation progresses from one to two and three levels, the contribution of cross-links and segmental pedicle screws to the overall construct stiffness increases.     

Residual stability of different interbody fusion techniques after pedicle screw loosening

INTRODUCTION: In spinal surgery, postoperative failure of pedicle screw instrumentation due to loosening of the implant at the bone-screw interface is a clinically relevant problem. While there are numerous biomechanical studies dealing with stability after internal fixation, little is known about the remaining segmental stability after pedicle screw loosening. We hypothesize that, in cases of implant loosening, the remaining stability is dependent on whether the segment received an isolated pedicle screw instrumentation or a 360 degrees instrumentation. METHODS: Motion analysis was performed under static, damage-free, sagittal strain (preload 100 N) on intact (controls) and posterior monosegmental L5/6 destabilized lumbar spines of sheep. Spine preparations underwent a flectional torque. Changes of spinal profile were radiographically documented, digitalized and then evaluated. Primary insertion of the conical pedicle screws was performed with a torque of 1.4 Nm. Pedicle screw loosening was simulated by turning the inserted screw back either 180 degrees or 540 degrees . Specimens instrumented with screws of differing diameters (5.5 mm and 6.7 mm) as well as non-instrumented pedicles were also compared. RESULTS: Independent of the type of instrumentation, we found that a loosening of pedicle screws increased remaining segmental motion. In maximal flexion (20 degrees ) and loosening of pedicle screws by 540 degrees, we found a statistically significant increase of remaining segmental motion with sole pedicle instrumentation (- 3.1 degrees ) in contrast to 360 degrees instrumentation (- 1.6 degrees ). For extension, a significant discrepancy between the two stabilization methods could not be shown. In cases where screws were firmly inserted, there was no advantage of using pedicle screws with an increased diameter of 6.7 mm. Independent of the type of fixation method, 5.5 mm screws that were inserted in widened pedicles showed a marked decrease of primary segmental stability. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that, concerning the remaining stability, 360 degrees instrumentation is superior in cases where pedicle screw loosening has occurred. The screw diameter plays an only subordinate role in primary segmental stability when the pedicle screws are inserted firmly.     

Biomechanical evaluation of five different occipito-atlanto-axial fixation techniques

STUDY DESIGN: The stabilizing effects of five different occipitocervical fixations were compared. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the construct stability provided by five different occipito-atlanto-axial fixation techniques. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Few studies have addressed occipitocervical reconstruction stability and no studies to data have investigated anterior-posterior translational stiffness. METHODS: A total of 21 human cadaveric spines were used. After testing intact spines (CO-C2), a type II dens fracture was created and five different reconstructions were performed: 1) occipital and sublaminar wiring/rectangular rod, 2) occipital screws and C2 lamina claw hooks/rod, 3) occipital screws, foramen magnum screws, and C1-C2 transarticular screws/rod, 4) occipital screws and C1-C2 transarticular screws/Y-plate, and 5) occipital screws and C2 pedicle screws/rod. Biomechanical testing parameters included axial rotation, flexion/extension, lateral bending, and anterior-posterior translation. RESULTS: Pedicle screw fixation demonstrated the highest stiffness among the five reconstructions (P < 0.05). The two types of transarticular screw methods provided greater stability than hook or wiring reconstructions (P < 0.05). The C2 claw hook technique resulted in greater stability than sublaminar wiring fixation in anterior-posterior translation (P < 0.05). However, the wiring procedure did not significantly increase the stiffness levels beyond the intact condition under anterior-posterior translation and lateral bending (P > 0.05). DISCUSSION: C2 transpedicular and C1-C2 transarticular screws significantly increased the stabilizing effect compared to sublaminar wiring and lamina hooks. The improved stability afforded by C2 pedicular and C1-C2 transarticular screws offer many potential advantages including a high rate of bony union, early ambulation, and easy nursing care. CONCLUSION: Occipitocervical reconstruction techniques using C1-C2 transarticular screws or C2 pedicle screws offer biomechanical advantages compared to sublaminar wiring or lamina hooks. Pedicle screw fixation exhibited the highest construct stiffness among the five reconstructions.     

A plate-rod device for treatment of cervicothoracic disorders: comparison of mechanical testing with established cervical spine in vitro load testing data

Posterior cervical internal fixation has long been accomplished using wires, hooks, and rods. More recently, the cervical lateral mass screw and plate or rod systems have been used effectively in unstable lower cervical spine disorders. Each form of fixation has its advantages and disadvantages. Interspinous wiring and lateral mass screw placement obviate canal penetration in the cervical region but are associated with a potential neurologic risk as a result of canal encroachment. Minor canal intrusion by laminar hooks in the thoracic spine pose a lesser neurologic risk than in the cervical region. To exploit the benefits and safety features of spinal instrumentation, a combination plate rod construct (PRC) has been developed that obviates canal penetration in the cervical region by way of lateral mass and cervical pedicle screw fixation and hooks or wires in the thoracic spine. A biomechanical analysis of the PRC device was performed and compared with the in vivo maximal load data of the cervical spine and established maximal load data of the Roy-Camille posterior cervical fixation system. The PRC has greater strength and resistance to failure than is necessary to sustain maximal in vivo cervical spine loads, and it has also compared favorably with the parameters of the Roy-Camille system. The PRC device, or variations on it, is an excellent option for spinal fixation across the cervicothoracic junction because of its superior biomechanical qualities and versatility in stabilizing a complex anatomic junction of the spine.     

Anterior exposures of the pediatric spine and posterior pedicle screw instrumentation

Treatment of spinal deformities, tumors, and trauma is greatly facilitated by correctly understanding the associated anatomy. Exposure of the spine, whether with a standard posterior dissection or a technically demanding costotransversectomy, facilitates surgical treatment of all disorders. When indicated, posterior instrumentation with pedicle screws allows for maximum rigidity and stability until arthrodesis ensues. Appropriate stepwise screw placement and confirmation of placement with radiographs and triggered electromyograms allows safe use of pedicle screws at all regions of the spine, with no associated morbidity to the patient. This article focuses on the classic approaches used to access the pediatric spine and discusses modern-day pedicle screw instrumentation for spinal pediatric deformity, trauma, or tumors.     

Posterior fixation of thoracolumbar burst fracture: short-segment pedicle fixation versus long-segment instrumentation

OBJECTIVE: The treatment of thoracolumbar burst fracture is a controversial issue. Short-segment (SS) pedicle fixation has become a popular treatment option. However, there are several studies regarding the high rate of failure. The aim of this prospective study was to compare SS versus long-segment (LS) instrumentation. METHODS: For this purpose, 18 consecutive patients were assigned to two groups. Group 1 included nine patients treated by SS pedicle fixation, whereas group 2 included nine patients treated by LS instrumentation. SS instrumentation was pedicle fixation one level above and below the fractured vertebra. LS instrumentation was hook fixation (claw hooks attached to second upper vertebra and infralaminar hooks attached to first upper vertebra) above and pedicle fixation (pedicle screws attached to first and second lower vertebrae) below the fractured vertebra. RESULTS: As a result, measurements of local kyphosis, sagittal index, and anterior vertebral height compression showed that the LS group had a better outcome at final follow-up (P < 0.05). Also, the SS group had a 55% failure rate, whereas the LS group had prolonged operative time and increased blood loss. However, there was no difference between the two groups according to Low Back Outcome Score. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, radiographic parameters demonstrated that LS instrumentation is a more effective management of thoracolumbar burst fractures. Nevertheless, clinical outcome was the same between the two groups. However, our conclusions were based on posterior-only surgery. Anterior column support would negate the need for LS fixation. Also, SS would have been more successful if two above and two below pedicle screws were used.