Biomechanical characteristics of C1-2 cable fixations

被引:90
|
作者
Dickman, CA [1 ]
Crawford, NR [1 ]
Paramore, CG [1 ]
机构
[1] ST JOSEPHS HOSP,BARROW NEUROL INST,DIV NEUROL SURG,SPINAL BIOMECH RES LAB,PHOENIX,AZ
关键词
atlas; axis; Brooks fusion; Gallie fusion; interspinous fusion; spinal biomechanics; spinal instability;
D O I
10.3171/jns.1996.85.2.0316
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
The biomechanical characteristics of four different methods of C1-2 cable fixation were studied to assess the effectiveness of each technique in restoring atlantoaxial stability. Biomechanical testing was performed on the upper cervical spines of four human cadaveric specimens. Physiological range loading was applied to the atlantoaxial specimens and three-dimensional motion was analyzed with stereophotogrammetry. The load-deformation relationships and kinematics were measured, including the stiffness, the angular ranges of motion, the linear ranges of motion, and the axes of rotation. Specimens were nondestructively tested in the intact state, after surgical destabilization, and after each of four different methods of cable fixation. Cable fixation techniques included the interspinous technique, the Brooks technique, and two variants of the Gallie technique. All specimens were tested immediately after fixation and again after the specimen was fatigued with 6000 cycles of physiological range torsional loading. All four cable fixation methods were moderately flexible immediately; the different cable fixations allowed between 5 degrees and 40 degrees of rotational motion and between 0.6 and 7 mm of translational motion to occur at C1-2. The Brooks and interspinous methods controlled C1-2 motion significantly better than both of the Gallie techniques. The motion allowed by one of the Gallie techniques did not differ significantly from the motion of the unfixed destabilized specimens. All cable fixation techniques loosened after cyclic loading and demonstrated significant increases in C1-2 rotational and translational motions. The bone grafts shifted during cyclic loading, which reduced the effectiveness of the fixation. The locations of the axes of rotation, which were unconstrained and mobile in the destabilized specimens, became altered with cable fixation. The C1-2 cables constrained motion by shifting the axes of rotation so that C-1 rotated around the fixed cable and graft site. After the specimen was fatigued, the axes of rotation became more widely dispersed but were usually still localized near the cable and graft site. Adequate healing requires satisfactory control. of C1-2 motion. Therefore, some adjunctive fixation is advocated to supplement the control of motion after C1-2 cable fixation (that is, a cervical collar, a halo brace, or rigid internal fixation with transarticular screws).
引用
收藏
页码:316 / 322
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Biomechanical comparison of C1-C2 posterior fixations - Cable, graft, and screw combinations
    Naderi, S
    Crawford, NR
    Song, GS
    Sonntag, VKH
    Dickman, CA
    SPINE, 1998, 23 (18) : 1946 - 1955
  • [2] Biomechanical comparison of C1-C2 posterior fixations - Cable, graft, and screw combinations - Point of view
    Cooper, PR
    SPINE, 1998, 23 (18) : 1955 - 1956
  • [3] Surgical nuances and construct patterns influence construct stiffness in C1-2 stabilizations: a biomechanical study of C1-2 gapping and advanced C1-2 fixation
    Heiko Koller
    Sebastian Hartmann
    Gmeiner Raphael
    Werner Schmölz
    Christoph Orban
    Claudius Thome
    European Spine Journal, 2021, 30 : 1596 - 1606
  • [4] Surgical nuances and construct patterns influence construct stiffness in C1-2 stabilizations: a biomechanical study of C1-2 gapping and advanced C1-2 fixation
    Koller, Heiko
    Hartmann, Sebastian
    Raphael, Gmeiner
    Schmoelz, Werner
    Orban, Christoph
    Thome, Claudius
    EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2021, 30 (06) : 1596 - 1606
  • [5] Biomechanical analysis of Goel technique for C1-2 fusion
    Park, Jon
    Scheer, Justin K.
    Lim, T. Jesse
    Deviren, Vedat
    Ames, Christopher P.
    JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY-SPINE, 2011, 14 (05) : 639 - 646
  • [6] Biomechanical comparison of C1-2 posterior fixation techniques
    Hott, JS
    Lynch, JJ
    Chamberlain, RH
    Sonntag, VKH
    Crawford, NR
    JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY-SPINE, 2005, 2 (02) : 175 - 181
  • [7] C1-2 ARTHROGRAPHY
    CHEVROT, A
    CERMAKOVA, E
    VALLEE, C
    CHANCELIER, MD
    CHEMLA, N
    ROUSSELIN, B
    LANGERCHERBIT, A
    SKELETAL RADIOLOGY, 1995, 24 (06) : 425 - 429
  • [8] C1-ring osteosynthesis versus C1-2 fixation in terms of C1-2 stability
    Hyub, Sang
    Park, Jin Hoon
    JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY-SPINE, 2023, 39 (01)
  • [9] Combination of skull traction with posterior C1-2 fusion for old C1-2 dislocations
    Li, Xue Feng
    Yang, Hui Lin
    Jiang, Wei Min
    Tang, Tian Si
    Gong, Xiao Hong
    Yuan, Jing
    Zhang, Ji Gang
    Wang, Gen Lin
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NEUROSCIENCE, 2011, 18 (06) : 768 - 773
  • [10] Biomechanical analysis of a novel hook-screw technique for C1-2 stabilization Technical note
    Reis, Marco Tulio
    Nottmeier, Eric W.
    Reyes, Phillip M.
    Baek, Seungwon
    Crawford, Neil R.
    JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY-SPINE, 2012, 17 (03) : 220 - 226