Liu Guan-Yi, Mao Lu, Xu Rong-Ming, Ma Wei-Hu
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Ningbo 6 Hospital, 315040, Ningbo, ZheJiang, People's Republic of China.
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University, School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Indian J Orthop. 2014 Nov;48(6):550-4. doi: 10.4103/0019-5413.144212.
Biomechanical studies have shown C2 pedicle screw to be the most robust in insertional torque and pullout strength. However, C2 pedicle screw placement is still technically challenging. Smaller C2 pedicles or medial localization of the vertebral artery may preclude safe C2 pedicle screw placement in some patients. The purpose of this study was to compare the pullout strength of spinous process screws with pedicle screws in the C2.
Eight fresh human cadaveric cervical spine specimens (C2) were harvested and subsequently frozen to -20°C. After being thawed to room temperature, each specimen was debrided of remaining soft tissue and labeled. A customs jig as used to clamp each specimen for screw insertion firmly. Screws were inserted into the vertebral body pairs on each side using one of two methods. The pedicle screws were inserted in usual manner as in previous biomechanical studies. The starting point for spinous process screw insertion was located at the junction of the lamina and the spinous process and the direction of the screw was about 0° caudally in the sagittal plane and about 0° medially in the axial plane. Each vertebrae was held in a customs jig, which was attached to material testing machine (Material Testing System Inc., Changchun, China). A coupling device that fit around the head of the screw was used to pull out each screw at a loading rate of 2 mm/min. The uniaxial load to failure was recorded in Newton'st dependent test (for paired samples) was used to test for significance.
The mean load to failure was 387 N for the special protection scheme and 465 N for the protection scheme without significant difference (t = -0.862, P = 0.403). In all but three instances (38%), the spinous process pullout values exceeded the values for the pedicle screws. The working distances for the spinous process screws was little shorter than pedicle screws in each C2 specimen.
Spinous process screws provide comparable pullout strength to pedicle screws of the C2. Spinous process screws may provide an alternative to pedicle screws fixation, especially with unusual anatomy or stripped screws.
生物力学研究表明,C2椎弓根螺钉在插入扭矩和拔出强度方面最为坚固。然而,C2椎弓根螺钉的置入在技术上仍具有挑战性。较小的C2椎弓根或椎动脉的内侧定位可能会使一些患者无法安全地置入C2椎弓根螺钉。本研究的目的是比较C2节段棘突螺钉与椎弓根螺钉的拔出强度。
采集8个新鲜的人体颈椎尸体标本(C2),随后冷冻至-20°C。解冻至室温后,清除每个标本上残留的软组织并进行标记。使用定制夹具将每个标本牢固夹紧以进行螺钉置入。采用两种方法之一将螺钉插入每侧的椎体对中。椎弓根螺钉以与先前生物力学研究相同的常规方式插入。棘突螺钉的置入起始点位于椎板与棘突的交界处,螺钉方向在矢状面约向尾侧0°,在轴位面约向内侧0°。每个椎体固定在一个定制夹具中,该夹具连接到材料试验机(中国长春材料测试系统公司)。使用一个围绕螺钉头部的耦合装置以2mm/min的加载速率拔出每个螺钉。记录单轴破坏载荷,单位为牛顿。采用配对样本t检验来检验显著性。
特殊保护方案的平均破坏载荷为387N,无保护方案的平均破坏载荷为465N,差异无统计学意义(t=-0.862,P=0.403)。除3例(38%)外,棘突拔出值均超过椎弓根螺钉的值。每个C2标本中棘突螺钉的工作长度比椎弓根螺钉略短。
棘突螺钉提供的拔出强度与C2椎弓根螺钉相当。棘突螺钉可能为椎弓根螺钉固定提供一种替代方法,特别是在解剖结构异常或螺钉滑丝的情况下。