TY - JOUR
T1 - Biomechanical analysis of anterior versus posterior instrumentation following a thoracolumbar corpectomy
AU - Viljoen, Stephanus V.
AU - DeVries Watson, Nicole A.
AU - Grosland, Nicole M.
AU - Torner, James
AU - Dalm, Brian
AU - Hitchon, Patrick W.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© AANS, 2014.
PY - 2014/10/1
Y1 - 2014/10/1
N2 - Object. The objective of this study was to evaluate the biomechanical properties of lateral instrumentation compared with short- and long-segment pedicle screw constructs following an L-1 corpectomy and reconstruction with an expandable cage.Methods. Eight human cadaveric T10-L4 spines underwent an L-1 corpectomy followed by placement of an expandable cage. The spines then underwent placement of lateral instrumentation consisting of 4 monoaxial screws and 2 rods with 2 cross-connectors, short-segment pedicle screw fixation involving 1 level above and below the corpectomy, and long-segment pedicle screw fixation (2 levels above and below). The order of instrumentation was randomized in the 8 specimens. Testing was conducted for each fixation technique. The spines were tested with a pure moment of 6 Nm in all 6 degrees of freedom (flexion, extension, right and left lateral bending, and right and left axial rotation).Results. In flexion, extension, and left/right lateral bending, posterior long-segment instrumentation had significantly less motion compared with the intact state. Additionally, posterior long-segment instrumentation was significantly more rigid than short-segment and lateral instrumentation in flexion, extension, and left/right lateral bending. In axial rotation, the posterior long-segment construct as well as lateral instrumentation were not significantly more rigid than the intact state. The posterior long-segment construct was the most rigid in all 6 degrees of freedom.Conclusions. In the setting of highly unstable fractures requiring anterior reconstruction, and involving all 3 columns, long-segment posterior pedicle screw constructs are the most rigid. (http://thejns.org/doi/abs/10.3171/2014.6.SPINE13751).
AB - Object. The objective of this study was to evaluate the biomechanical properties of lateral instrumentation compared with short- and long-segment pedicle screw constructs following an L-1 corpectomy and reconstruction with an expandable cage.Methods. Eight human cadaveric T10-L4 spines underwent an L-1 corpectomy followed by placement of an expandable cage. The spines then underwent placement of lateral instrumentation consisting of 4 monoaxial screws and 2 rods with 2 cross-connectors, short-segment pedicle screw fixation involving 1 level above and below the corpectomy, and long-segment pedicle screw fixation (2 levels above and below). The order of instrumentation was randomized in the 8 specimens. Testing was conducted for each fixation technique. The spines were tested with a pure moment of 6 Nm in all 6 degrees of freedom (flexion, extension, right and left lateral bending, and right and left axial rotation).Results. In flexion, extension, and left/right lateral bending, posterior long-segment instrumentation had significantly less motion compared with the intact state. Additionally, posterior long-segment instrumentation was significantly more rigid than short-segment and lateral instrumentation in flexion, extension, and left/right lateral bending. In axial rotation, the posterior long-segment construct as well as lateral instrumentation were not significantly more rigid than the intact state. The posterior long-segment construct was the most rigid in all 6 degrees of freedom.Conclusions. In the setting of highly unstable fractures requiring anterior reconstruction, and involving all 3 columns, long-segment posterior pedicle screw constructs are the most rigid. (http://thejns.org/doi/abs/10.3171/2014.6.SPINE13751).
KW - Anterior instrumentation
KW - Biomechanics
KW - Posterior instrumentation
KW - Thoracic
KW - Thoracolumbar corpectomy
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84907876800&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84907876800&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3171/2014.6.SPINE13751
DO - 10.3171/2014.6.SPINE13751
M3 - Article
C2 - 25084029
AN - SCOPUS:84907876800
SN - 1547-5654
VL - 21
SP - 577
EP - 581
JO - Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine
JF - Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine
IS - 4
ER -