The First Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University, Haerbin, Heilongjiang 150001, China.
Chin Med J (Engl). 2013 Jan;126(2):300-5.
Posterior pedicle screw device is widely used in treatment of thoracolumbar burst fractures. As the clinical operation is not based upon quantitative data of adjustments, the results are not optimal. At present, no study has assessed the associations between the device adjustments and the restoration of stiffness. We investigated the biomechanical effects that adjustments of a pedicle screw device had on the burst fracture, and explored an optimal adjustment.
Burst fractures were produced at L1 vertebra in 24 fresh calf spines (T12-L3). The specimens were divided into four groups at random. Pedicle screw devices were attached to T13 and L2. Four device adjustments, consisting of distraction and extension, were applied. Adjustment 1 was pure 6° extension, adjustment 2 was pure 5 mm distraction, adjustment 3 was 6° extension followed by 5 mm distraction, and adjustment 4 was 5 mm distraction followed by 6° extension. The effect of each adjustment on the stiffness restoration, anatomical reduction, and neural decompression for the burst fractures was analyzed and evaluated.
Pure extension (Group 1) produced the closest segment height and the least restoration of the canal to the intact. Pure distraction (Group 2) restored stiffness most, but with only 60% stiffness of the intact value, and lost the segmental angle most to the intact. The combination of extension-distraction (Group 3 and Group 4) produced the maximum reduction of the anatomy and restoration of the canal in the burst fracture, and the least stiffness restoration. The sequence of extension and distraction did not affect stiffness restoration, anatomical reduction, and neural decompression.
The device adjustments affected stiffness restoration, anatomical reduction, and neural decompression. The combined extension-distraction adjustment may be the most suitable considering the anatomical reduction and neural decompression, but the stiffness decreased the most; it should be considered to reconstruct L1 vertebra.
后路椎弓根螺钉系统广泛应用于胸腰椎爆裂性骨折的治疗。由于临床操作并非基于调整的定量数据,因此效果并不理想。目前,尚无研究评估器械调整与刚度恢复之间的关系。我们研究了椎弓根螺钉系统调整对爆裂性骨折的生物力学影响,并探讨了一种最佳的调整方法。
在 24 个新鲜小牛脊柱(T12-L3)的 L1 椎体上产生爆裂性骨折。标本随机分为四组。在 T13 和 L2 上附加椎弓根螺钉系统。进行四种器械调整,包括牵伸和延伸。调整 1 为纯 6°延伸,调整 2 为纯 5mm 牵伸,调整 3 为 6°延伸后 5mm 牵伸,调整 4 为 5mm 牵伸后 6°延伸。分析和评估每种调整对爆裂性骨折的刚度恢复、解剖复位和神经减压的效果。
纯延伸(第 1 组)使节段高度最接近,对椎管的恢复最接近完整。纯牵伸(第 2 组)使刚度恢复最大,但仅为完整值的 60%,节段角度恢复最小。延伸-牵伸联合(第 3 组和第 4 组)使爆裂性骨折的解剖复位和椎管恢复最大,刚度恢复最小。延伸和牵伸的顺序不影响刚度恢复、解剖复位和神经减压。
器械调整影响刚度恢复、解剖复位和神经减压。考虑到解剖复位和神经减压,联合延伸-牵伸调整可能最合适,但刚度降低最多;应考虑重建 L1 椎体。