Pedicle Screw Configuration for Thoracolumbar Burst Fracture Treatment: Short versus Long Posterior Fixation Constructs with and without Anterior Column Augmentation
- PMID: 24596603
- PMCID: PMC3939367
- DOI: 10.4184/asj.2014.8.1.35
Pedicle Screw Configuration for Thoracolumbar Burst Fracture Treatment: Short versus Long Posterior Fixation Constructs with and without Anterior Column Augmentation
Abstract
Study design: An in-vitro study.
Purpose: The current study is aimed at investigating the differences in stability between short posterior fixation (SPF), hybrid posterior fixation (HPF), and long posterior fixation (LPF) with and without anterior column augmentation using calcium phosphate bone cement (CaP) for treating burst fractures (BFs).
Overview of literature: The ideal treatment for thoracolumbar BF is controversial regarding the use of short or LPF constructs.
Methods: Seven human thoracolumbar spines (T9-L4) were tested on a six degree of freedom spine simulator in three physiologic planes, flexion-extension (FE), lateral bending (LB), and axial rotation (AR). Tested surgical constructs included the following: intact, injury (BF), SPF (T12-L2), HPF (T11-L2), LPF (T11-L3), SPF+CaP, HPF+CaP, LPF+CaP, and CaP alone (CaP). Range of motion (ROM) was recorded at T12-L2 in FE, LB, and AR.
Results: THE REDUCTION IN MEAN ROM TRENDED AS FOLLOWS: LPF>HPF>SPF. Only LPF constructs and HPF with anterior column augmentation significantly reduced mean ROM in FE and LB compared to the intact state. All instrumented constructs (SPF, HPF, and LPF) significantly reduced ROM in FE and LB compared to the injured condition. Furthermore, the instrumented constructs did not provide significant rotational stability. Injecting CaP provided minimal additional stability.
Conclusions: For the injury created, LPF and HPF provided better stability than SPF with and without anterior column augmentation. Therefore, highly unstable fractures may require extended, long or hybrid fusion constructs for optimum stability.
Keywords: Bone cements; Bone screws; Fracture fixations; Spine.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors acknowledge the funding for this project paid for by Globus Medical, Inc., which was conducted using machines and other equipment within their research department. Funding was provided in terms of staff salaries.
Figures
References
-
- Guven O, Kocaoglu B, Bezer M, Aydin N, Nalbantoglu U. The use of screw at the fracture level in the treatment of thoracolumbar burst fractures. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2009;22:417–421. - PubMed
-
- Mahar A, Kim C, Wedemeyer M, et al. Short-segment fixation of lumbar burst fractures using pedicle fixation at the level of the fracture. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2007;32:1503–1507. - PubMed
-
- Tezeren G, Gumus C, Bulut O, Tukenmez M, Oztemur Z, Sever G. Anterior versus modified combined instrumentation for burst fractures of the thoracolumbar spine: a biomechanical study in calves. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong) 2008;16:281–284. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Research Materials
Miscellaneous
