Department of Orthopaedics.
Department of Surgery.
Clin Spine Surg. 2023 Jun 1;36(5):E212-E217. doi: 10.1097/BSD.0000000000001429. Epub 2023 Feb 22.
Controlled Laboratory Study.
To compare multilevel posterior cervical fusion (PCF) constructs stopping at C7, T1, and T2 under cyclic load to determine the range of motion (ROM) between the lowest instrumented level and lowest instrumented-adjacent level (LIV-1).
PCF is a mainstay of treatment for various cervical spine conditions. The transition between the flexible cervical spine and rigid thoracic spine can lead to construct failure at the cervicothoracic junction. There is little evidence to determine the most appropriate level at which to stop a multilevel PCF.
Fifteen human cadaveric cervicothoracic spines were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 treatment groups: PCF stopping at C7, T1, or T2. Specimens were tested in their native state, following a simulated PCF, and after cyclic loading. Specimens were loaded in flexion-extension), lateral bending, and axial rotation. Three-dimensional kinematics were recorded to evaluate ROM.
The C7 group had greater flexion-extension motion than the T1 and T2 groups following instrumentation (10.17±0.83 degree vs. 2.77±1.66 degree and 1.06±0.55 degree, P <0.001), and after cyclic loading (10.42±2.30 degree vs. 2.47±0.64 degree and 1.99±1.23 degree, P <0.001). There was no significant difference between the T1 and T2 groups. The C7 group had greater lateral bending ROM than both thoracic groups after instrumentation (8.81±3.44 degree vs. 3.51±2.52 degree, P =0.013 and 1.99±1.99 degree, P =0.003) and after cyclic loading. The C7 group had greater axial rotation motion than the thoracic groups (4.46±2.27 degree vs. 1.26±0.69 degree, P =0.010; and 0.73±0.74 degree, P =0.003) following cyclic loading.
Motion at the cervicothoracic junction is significantly greater when a multilevel PCF stops at C7 rather than T1 or T2. This is likely attributable to the transition from a flexible cervical spine to a rigid thoracic spine. Although this does not account for in vivo fusion, surgeons should consider extending multilevel PCF constructs to T1 when feasible.
Not applicable.
对照实验室研究。
比较在循环载荷下止于 C7、T1 和 T2 的多节段颈椎后路融合(PCF)结构,以确定最低节段融合水平与最低节段融合相邻水平(LIV-1)之间的活动范围(ROM)。
PCF 是治疗各种颈椎疾病的主要方法。颈椎与胸椎之间的灵活过渡可导致颈椎胸椎交界处的结构失效。几乎没有证据可以确定在多节段 PCF 中停止的最合适水平。
15 具人体颈椎胸椎尸体标本被随机分配到 3 个治疗组之一:止于 C7、T1 或 T2 的 PCF。标本在其自然状态、模拟 PCF 后和循环加载后进行测试。标本在屈伸、侧屈和轴向旋转中加载。三维运动学用于评估 ROM。
在仪器化后(10.17±0.83 度与 2.77±1.66 度和 1.06±0.55 度,P <0.001)和循环加载后(10.42±2.30 度与 2.47±0.64 度和 1.99±1.23 度,P <0.001),C7 组的屈伸运动大于 T1 和 T2 组。在仪器化后(8.81±3.44 度与 3.51±2.52 度,P =0.013 和 1.99±1.99 度,P =0.003)和循环加载后,C7 组的侧屈 ROM 大于两个胸椎组。在循环加载后,C7 组的轴向旋转运动大于胸椎组(4.46±2.27 度与 1.26±0.69 度,P =0.010;和 0.73±0.74 度,P =0.003)。
当多节段 PCF 止于 C7 而不是 T1 或 T2 时,颈椎胸椎交界处的运动明显更大。这可能归因于从灵活的颈椎到刚性的胸椎的过渡。尽管这不能说明体内融合,但当可行时,外科医生应考虑将多节段 PCF 结构延伸至 T1。
不适用。