Background Transfacet pedicle screws provide another alternative for standard pedicle screw placement for plate fixation in the lumbar spine. However, few studies looking at transfacet pedicle screw fixation in the ce...Background Transfacet pedicle screws provide another alternative for standard pedicle screw placement for plate fixation in the lumbar spine. However, few studies looking at transfacet pedicle screw fixation in the cervical spine are available. Therefore, cervical transfacet pedicle screw fixation and standard pedicle screw fixation techniques were biomechanically compared in this study. Methods Ten fresh human cadaveric cervical spines were harvested. On one side, transfacet pedicle screws were placed at the C3-4, C5-6, and C7-T1 levels. On the other side, pedicle screws were placed at the C3, C5, and C7 levels. The screw insertion technique at each level was randomized for right or left. The starting point for the transfacet pedicle screw insertion was located at the midpoint of the inferolateral quadrant of the lateral mass and the direction of the screw was about 50° caudally in the sagittal plane and about 45° toward the midline in the axial plane. Screws were placed from the inferior articular process, across the facet complex and the pedicle into the body of the caudal vertebra. The entry point for the pedicle screw was located at the midpoint of the superolateral quadrant of the lateral mass, and the direction of the screw was about 45° toward the midline in the axial plane and toward the upper third of the vertebral body in the sagittal plane. After screw placement we performed axial pullout testing. Results All the cervical transfacet pedicle screws and the pedicle screws were inserted successfully. The mean pullout strength for the transfacet pedicle screws was 694 N, while for the pedicle screws 670 N （P=0.013）. In all but six instances （10%）, the pedicle screw pullout values exceeded the values for the transfacet pedicle screws; this occurred three times at the C3/C4 level, twice at the C5/C6 level and once at the C7/T1 level. The greatest pullout strength difference at a single level was observed at the C5/C6 level, with a mean difference of 38 N （t=-1.557, P=0.154）. The C7/T1 level had a mean difference of 26 N and the C3/C4 level had a mean difference of 14 N. Conclusions Cervical transfacet pedicle screws exhibited higher pullout strength than pedicle screws. Posterior transfacet pedicle screw fixation in the cervical spine may afford an alternative to standard screw placement for plate fixation and cervical stabilization.展开更多
目的建立人体下颈椎C3~7节段前路椎体次全切除钛网植骨融合术的三维有限元模型,分析术后椎体稳定性及内固定器械的应力分布。方法建立前路椎体C5节段次全切除钛网植骨钢板螺钉内固定颈椎C3~7节段有限元模型,同时建立C3~7节段下颈椎原始...目的建立人体下颈椎C3~7节段前路椎体次全切除钛网植骨融合术的三维有限元模型,分析术后椎体稳定性及内固定器械的应力分布。方法建立前路椎体C5节段次全切除钛网植骨钢板螺钉内固定颈椎C3~7节段有限元模型,同时建立C3~7节段下颈椎原始模型。对术后模型分别施加0.5、1.0、1.5、2.0 N·m扭矩,分析前屈、后伸、侧弯及轴向旋转时关节活动度(range of motion,ROM)、关节突关节最大应力与内固定器械整体应力分布情况。结果前路椎体次全切除减压融合术(cervical corpectomy and fusion,ACCF)后,C5重建节段ROM随扭矩的增大而增加,与无损模型在1.0 N·m、预载荷50 N工况下相比,C5重建节段、C3~4,C6~7和C3~7节段ROM分别下降81%、62%、58%和80%;C5重建节段后方关节突关节最大应力减小,临近节段关节突关节应力显著升高;钛网应力主要分布于运动受压侧,螺钉根部承受较大载荷。结论 ACCF术式会较大提升颈椎稳定性,降低手术节段后方关节突关节应力,对于减缓因脊髓型颈椎病引起的脊髓压迫有较好疗效。研究结果可为ACCF手术的临床应用研究提供理论依据。展开更多
文摘Background Transfacet pedicle screws provide another alternative for standard pedicle screw placement for plate fixation in the lumbar spine. However, few studies looking at transfacet pedicle screw fixation in the cervical spine are available. Therefore, cervical transfacet pedicle screw fixation and standard pedicle screw fixation techniques were biomechanically compared in this study. Methods Ten fresh human cadaveric cervical spines were harvested. On one side, transfacet pedicle screws were placed at the C3-4, C5-6, and C7-T1 levels. On the other side, pedicle screws were placed at the C3, C5, and C7 levels. The screw insertion technique at each level was randomized for right or left. The starting point for the transfacet pedicle screw insertion was located at the midpoint of the inferolateral quadrant of the lateral mass and the direction of the screw was about 50° caudally in the sagittal plane and about 45° toward the midline in the axial plane. Screws were placed from the inferior articular process, across the facet complex and the pedicle into the body of the caudal vertebra. The entry point for the pedicle screw was located at the midpoint of the superolateral quadrant of the lateral mass, and the direction of the screw was about 45° toward the midline in the axial plane and toward the upper third of the vertebral body in the sagittal plane. After screw placement we performed axial pullout testing. Results All the cervical transfacet pedicle screws and the pedicle screws were inserted successfully. The mean pullout strength for the transfacet pedicle screws was 694 N, while for the pedicle screws 670 N （P=0.013）. In all but six instances （10%）, the pedicle screw pullout values exceeded the values for the transfacet pedicle screws; this occurred three times at the C3/C4 level, twice at the C5/C6 level and once at the C7/T1 level. The greatest pullout strength difference at a single level was observed at the C5/C6 level, with a mean difference of 38 N （t=-1.557, P=0.154）. The C7/T1 level had a mean difference of 26 N and the C3/C4 level had a mean difference of 14 N. Conclusions Cervical transfacet pedicle screws exhibited higher pullout strength than pedicle screws. Posterior transfacet pedicle screw fixation in the cervical spine may afford an alternative to standard screw placement for plate fixation and cervical stabilization.
文摘目的建立人体下颈椎C3~7节段前路椎体次全切除钛网植骨融合术的三维有限元模型,分析术后椎体稳定性及内固定器械的应力分布。方法建立前路椎体C5节段次全切除钛网植骨钢板螺钉内固定颈椎C3~7节段有限元模型,同时建立C3~7节段下颈椎原始模型。对术后模型分别施加0.5、1.0、1.5、2.0 N·m扭矩,分析前屈、后伸、侧弯及轴向旋转时关节活动度(range of motion,ROM)、关节突关节最大应力与内固定器械整体应力分布情况。结果前路椎体次全切除减压融合术(cervical corpectomy and fusion,ACCF)后,C5重建节段ROM随扭矩的增大而增加,与无损模型在1.0 N·m、预载荷50 N工况下相比,C5重建节段、C3~4,C6~7和C3~7节段ROM分别下降81%、62%、58%和80%;C5重建节段后方关节突关节最大应力减小,临近节段关节突关节应力显著升高;钛网应力主要分布于运动受压侧,螺钉根部承受较大载荷。结论 ACCF术式会较大提升颈椎稳定性,降低手术节段后方关节突关节应力,对于减缓因脊髓型颈椎病引起的脊髓压迫有较好疗效。研究结果可为ACCF手术的临床应用研究提供理论依据。
