Suppr超能文献

一种用于枕颈后路内固定的新型模块化棒-螺钉植入系统的生物力学评估:与两种成熟植入系统的体外比较

Biomechanical evaluation of a new modular rod-screw implant system for posterior instrumentation of the occipito-cervical spine: in-vitro comparison with two established implant systems.

作者信息

Richter M, Wilke H J, Kluger P, Neller S, Claes L, Puhl W

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedics and SCI, University of Ulm, Germany.

出版信息

Eur Spine J. 2000 Oct;9(5):417-25. doi: 10.1007/s005860000173.

Abstract

Posterior instrumentation of the occipito-cervical spine has become an established procedure in a variety of indications. The use of rod-screw systems improved posterior instrumentation as it allows optimal screw positioning adapted to the individual anatomic situation. However, there are still some drawbacks concerning the different implant designs. Therefore, a new modular rod-screw implant system has been developed to overcome some of the drawbacks of established systems. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether posterior internal fixation of the occipito-cervical spine with the new implant system improves primary biomechanical stability. Three different internal fixation systems were compared in this study: the CerviFix System, the Olerud Cervical Rod Spinal System and the newly developed Neon Occipito Cervical System. Eight human cervical spine CO/C5 specimens were instrumented from C0 to C4 with occipital fixation, transarticular screws in C1/C2 and lateral mass or pedicle screws in C3 and C4. The specimens were tested in flexion/extension, axial rotation, and lateral bending using pure moments of +/- 2.5 Nm without axial preload. After testing the intact spine, the different instrumentations were tested after destabilising C0/C2 and C3/C4. Primary stability was significantly increased, in all load cases, with the new modular implant system compared to the other implant systems. Pedicle screw instrumentation tended to be more stable compared to lateral mass screws; nevertheless, significant differences were observed only for lateral bending. As the experimental design precluded any cyclic testing, the data represent only the primary stability of the implants. In summary, this study showed that posterior instrumentation of the cervical spine using the new Neon Occipito Cervical System improves primary biomechanical stability compared to the CerviFix System and the Olerud Cervical Rod Spinal System.

摘要

枕颈后路内固定术已成为多种适应症下的既定手术方法。棒-螺钉系统的使用改进了后路内固定,因为它能根据个体解剖情况实现最佳螺钉定位。然而,不同的植入物设计仍存在一些缺点。因此,已开发出一种新型模块化棒-螺钉植入系统,以克服现有系统的一些缺点。本研究的目的是评估使用新型植入系统进行枕颈后路内固定是否能提高初始生物力学稳定性。本研究比较了三种不同的内固定系统:CerviFix系统、Olerud颈椎棒脊柱系统和新开发的Neon枕颈系统。八具人类颈椎C0/C5标本从C0至C4进行内固定,包括枕骨固定、C1/C2经关节螺钉以及C3和C4的侧块或椎弓根螺钉。在无轴向预载的情况下,使用±2.5 Nm的纯力矩对标本进行屈伸、轴向旋转和侧方弯曲测试。在测试完整脊柱后,在破坏C0/C2和C3/C4稳定性后对不同的内固定进行测试。与其他植入系统相比,新型模块化植入系统在所有载荷情况下的初始稳定性均显著提高。与侧块螺钉相比,椎弓根螺钉内固定往往更稳定;然而,仅在侧方弯曲时观察到显著差异。由于实验设计排除了任何循环测试,数据仅代表植入物的初始稳定性。总之,本研究表明,与CerviFix系统和Olerud颈椎棒脊柱系统相比,使用新型Neon枕颈系统进行颈椎后路内固定可提高初始生物力学稳定性。

相似文献

4
Biomechanical comparison of occiput-C1-C2 fixation techniques: C0-C1 transarticular screw and direct occiput condyle screw.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2012 May 20;37(12):E696-701. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3182436669.
5
Biomechanical comparison of two-level cervical locking posterior screw/rod and hook/rod techniques.
Spine J. 2007 Mar-Apr;7(2):194-204. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2006.04.015. Epub 2006 Dec 22.
6
Biomechanical evaluation of occipitocervicothoracic fusion: impact of partial or sequential fixation.
Spine J. 2008 Sep-Oct;8(5):821-6. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2007.05.008. Epub 2007 Jul 19.
7
Biomechanical comparison of cervical spine reconstructive techniques after a multilevel corpectomy of the cervical spine.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003 Oct 15;28(20):2352-8; discussion 2358. doi: 10.1097/01.BRS.0000085344.22471.23.
10
Biomechanical comparison of transarticular facet screws to lateral mass plates in two-level instrumentations of the cervical spine.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005 Apr 15;30(8):897-2. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000158937.64577.25.

引用本文的文献

2
Percutaneous, Navigated Minimally Invasive Posterior Cervical Pedicle Screw Fixation.
Int J Spine Surg. 2020 Dec;14(s3):S14-S21. doi: 10.14444/7122. Epub 2020 Oct 29.
3
Pedicle screw placement accuracy in thoracic and lumbar spinal surgery with a patient-matched targeting guide: a cadaveric study.
Eur Spine J. 2015 Nov;24 Suppl 7:937-41. doi: 10.1007/s00586-015-4261-y. Epub 2015 Oct 23.
5
Biomechanical and histological evaluation of an expandable pedicle screw in osteoporotic spine in sheep.
Eur Spine J. 2010 Dec;19(12):2122-9. doi: 10.1007/s00586-010-1489-4. Epub 2010 Jun 25.
6
Clinical accuracy of cervical pedicle screw insertion using lateral fluoroscopy: a radiographic analysis of the learning curve.
Eur Spine J. 2009 Sep;18(9):1326-34. doi: 10.1007/s00586-009-1109-3. Epub 2009 Aug 4.
7
Intra-osseous ultrasound for pedicle screw positioning in the subaxial cervical spine: an experimental study.
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2010 Apr;152(4):655-61. doi: 10.1007/s00701-009-0447-6. Epub 2009 Jul 14.
8
Complications of transpedicular screw fixation in the cervical spine.
Eur Spine J. 2006 Mar;15(3):327-34. doi: 10.1007/s00586-004-0861-7. Epub 2005 May 24.
10
Factors affecting the interface of cervical spine facet screws placed in the technique by Roy-Camille et al.
Eur Spine J. 2004 Oct;13(6):524-9. doi: 10.1007/s00586-004-0685-5. Epub 2004 Mar 27.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验