A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Biomechanical evaluation of contemporary posterior spinal internal fixation configurations in an unstable burst-fracture calf spine model: special references of hook configurations and pedicle screws. | LitMetric

Study Design: This study attempts to determine the most biomechanically rigid posterior spinal instrumentation configuration in a burst-fracture calf spine model.

Objectives: To compare the biomechanical stability of contemporary posterior spinal instrumentation in various hook and screw configurations in an unstable calf spine model.

Summary Of Background Data: Burst-fractures are relatively common injuries seen in the setting of spinal trauma. The use of posterior-only configurations in the treatment of this deformity has become a much more popular approach because of the relative ease of applying the instrumentation.

Methods: Fresh frozen in vitro study using 10 calf spines involving the T11-S1 vertebral segments. Pure moment forces including flexion, extension, axial rotation, and lateral bending were applied to the top of the spinal column at T11. Testing was first performed on all intact specimens. A corpectomy was then performed at L2. Testing was then repeated on each of the ten specimens after internal fixation with different posterior spinal configurations using ISOLA instrumentation (DePuy AcroMed Inc., Raynham, MA).

Results: With regards to flexion-extension and lateral bending, all configurations except for distraction hook-rod construct provided stability greater than the intact spine. The distraction hook-rod configuration failed to control extension (P > 0.05) above the intact specimen. All pedicle screw constructs were more rigid than the hook-rod constructs in axial rotation at the level of injury (P < 0.001).

Conclusions: The motion segment at the corpectomy site is adequately stabilized by contemporary spinal internal fixation configurations tested except for the distraction-hook stabilization. Axial rotation is generally poorly controlled by posterior-only internal fixation. Pedicle screw instrumentation was the most rigid compared with other forms of stabilization in stabilizing a burst-corpectomy defect. Based on this study, pedicle screw configurations are preferred over hook-rod strategies in the posterior stabilization of a burst-corpectomy anterior defect. Among hook-rod configurations, the distraction hook-rod strategy provided the least stability.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/01.brs.0000106979.54651.d6DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

posterior spinal
16
internal fixation
16
calf spine
12
axial rotation
12
distraction hook-rod
12
pedicle screw
12
configurations
9
contemporary posterior
8
spinal internal
8
fixation configurations
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!