Lim T H, An H S, Hong J H, Ahn J Y, You J W, Eck J, McGrady L M
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, USA.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1997 Feb 1;22(3):261-6. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199702010-00005.
Fresh calf lumbar spines were used to perform flexibility tests in multiple loading directions to compare the stabilizing effects of anterior and posterior rigid instrumentations.
To compare the biomechanical flexibility of anterior and posterior instrumentation constructs using an unstable calf spine model.
Unstable burst fractures of the thoracolumbar spine can be managed anteriorly or posteriorly. Controversy persists, however, on the merit of anterior fixation versus that of posterior fixation in terms of how much stability can be achieved.
Fifteen fresh calf spines (L2-L5) were loaded with pure unconstrained moments in flexion, extension, axial rotation, and lateral bending directions. After removal of L3-L4 disc and endplates to create an 1.5-cm anterior and middle column defect, testing was performed on five specimens after anterior Kaneda rod fixation, anterior University Plate fixation, or posterior ISOLA pedicle screw fixation (AcroMed, Cleveland, OH). Testing was repeated after inserting a polymethylmethacrylate block to stimulate an interbody anterior graft with instrumentation.
All fixation devices provided a significant stabilizing effect in flexion and lateral bending. In extension, all constructs except ISOLA (AcroMed) without graft were stiffer than the intact specimen. In axial rotation with no graft, only the Kaneda device significantly reduced the flexibility from that of the intact specimen. The interbody graft provided additional rigidity to the ISOLA (AcroMed) instrumentation construct in flexion and extension and to the Kaneda construct in lateral bending. There was no significant effect of grafting in axial rotation.
A short, transpedicular instrumentation, such as ISOLA (AcroMed), provided less rigid fixation in flexion and extension without the anterior structural graft. The Kaneda rod and University plate with grafting provided a significant stabilizing effect in all directions compared with the intact specimen. When no graft was inserted, the Kaneda device was more effective in preventing axial rotation than the other devices. In lateral bending, the University plate provided more rigid fixation than the Kaneda device without grafting.
使用新鲜小牛腰椎在多个加载方向上进行柔韧性测试,以比较前路和后路刚性内固定的稳定效果。
使用不稳定小牛脊柱模型比较前路和后路内固定结构的生物力学柔韧性。
胸腰椎不稳定爆裂骨折可采用前路或后路治疗。然而,在前路固定与后路固定在可实现的稳定程度方面的优点上,争议仍然存在。
对15个新鲜小牛脊柱(L2-L5)在屈曲、伸展、轴向旋转和侧方弯曲方向施加纯无约束力矩。在切除L3-L4椎间盘和终板以制造1.5厘米的前路和中柱缺损后,对5个标本进行前路Kaneda棒固定、前路大学钢板固定或后路ISOLA椎弓根螺钉固定(AcroMed,克利夫兰,俄亥俄州)后进行测试。在插入聚甲基丙烯酸甲酯块以模拟前路椎间融合器与内固定联合使用后重复测试。
所有固定装置在屈曲和侧方弯曲时均提供了显著的稳定效果。在伸展时,除未植骨的ISOLA(AcroMed)外,所有结构均比完整标本更硬。在无植骨的轴向旋转时,只有Kaneda装置显著降低了与完整标本相比的柔韧性。椎间融合器在屈曲和伸展时为ISOLA(AcroMed)内固定结构以及在侧方弯曲时为Kaneda结构提供了额外的刚度。植骨在轴向旋转时没有显著影响。
短节段经椎弓根内固定,如ISOLA(AcroMed),在没有前路结构植骨时,在屈曲和伸展时提供的固定刚度较小。与完整标本相比,植骨的Kaneda棒和大学钢板在所有方向上均提供了显著的稳定效果。当未插入植骨时,Kaneda装置在防止轴向旋转方面比其他装置更有效。在侧方弯曲时,大学钢板比未植骨的Kaneda装置提供了更硬的固定。