Biomechanical comparison of a C1 posterior arch clamp with C1 lateral mass screws in constructs for C1-C2 fusion

The aim of this experimental study was to assess the biomechanical performance of a novel C1 posterior arch (C1PA) clamp compared with C1 lateral mass (C1LM) screws in constructs used to treat atlantoaxial instability. These constructs had either C2 pedicle (C2P) screws or C2 translaminar (C2TL) screws. Eight fresh-frozen human cadaveric ligamentous spine specimens (C0-C3) were tested under six conditions: the intact state, the destabilized state after a simulated odontoid fracture, and when instrumented with four constructs (C1LM-C2P, C1LM-C2TL, C1PA-C2P, C1PA-C2TL). Each specimen was tested in a spinal loading simulator that separately applied axial rotation, flexion-extension and lateral bending. In each test condition, displacement controlled angular motion was applied in both directions at a speed of 2 deg/s until a resulting moment of 1.5 Nm was achieved. The measured ranges of motion (ROM) of the C1-C2 segments were compared for each test condition using nonparametric Friedman tests. The destabilized state had significantly more C1-C2 motion ( p < 0.05) than the intact state in all cases, and all constructs greatly reduced this motion. C2 pedicle screw constructs that used the C1PA clamp had significantly less C1-C2 motion ( p < 0.05) than those with C1LM screws in flexion-extension as well as axial rotation and no statistically significant difference was detected in lateral bending. C2 translaminar screw constructs that used the C1PA clamp had significantly less C1-C2 motion ( p < 0.05) than those with C1LM screws in flexion-extension and no statistically significant difference was detected in axial rotation or in lateral bending. Data from the current study suggested that constructs using the novel C1PA clamp would provide as good, or improved, biomechanical stability to the C1-C2 segment compared with constructs using C1LM screws.

Bicortical Laminar Screws for Posterior Fixation of Subaxial Cervical Spine: A Radiologic Analysis With Computed Tomography Images

Study Design: Retrospective radiological analysis. Objectives: Translaminar screw (TLS) placement is one of the fixation techniques in the subaxial cervical spine. However, it can be difficult to use in small diameter of the lamina. This study proposed a novel bicortical laminar screw (BLS) and analyzed the related parameters using computed tomography (CT). Methods: Cervical CT images taken at our institution from January 2013 to March 2017 were used for measurement. On the axial images, the maximum screw length (MSL) and trajectory angle (TA) of BLS and TLS were measured, together with the distance from the midline (DM) to the BLS entry point and the lamina width (LW). On the parasagittal images, the height of the lamina (LH) was measured. Results: MSL of BLS and TLS were 21.00 and 20.97 mm, 19.02 and 20.91 mm, 18.45 and 21.01 mm, and 20.00 and 21.01 mm in C3, C4, C5, and C6, respectively. TA of the BLS and TLS were 21.24° and 34.90°, 19.05° and 34.22°, 18.65° and 33.61°, and 18.30° and 34.51° at C3, C4, C5, and C6, respectively. DM were 6.44, 5.77, 5.68, and 6.03 at C3, C4, C5, and C6, respectively. LW and LH were 3.52 and 12.44 mm, 2.87 and 12.49 mm, 2.76 and 12.42 mm, and 3.18 and 13.30 mm at C3, C4, C5, and C6, respectively. Conclusion: We suggest that BLS fixation is a feasible alternative option for posterior fixation to the lamina of the subaxial cervical spine. It may be especially useful when pedicle screw, lateral mass screw, and TLS are not appropriate.

Biomechanical evaluation of two alternative techniques to the Goel-Harms technique for atlantoaxial fixation: C1 lateral mass–C2 bicortical translaminar screw fixation and C1 lateral mass–C2/3 transarticular screw fixation

OBJECTIVEThe authors conducted a study to investigate the biomechanical feasibility and stability of C1 lateral mass–C2 bicortical translaminar screw (C1LM-C2TL) fixation, C1 lateral mass–C2/3 transarticular screw (C1LM-C2/3TA) fixation, and C1LM-C2/3TA fixation with transverse cross-links (C1LM-C2/3TACL) as alternative techniques to the Goel-Harms technique (C1 lateral mass–C2 pedicle screw [C1LM-C2PS] fixation) for atlantoaxial fixation.METHODSEight human cadaveric cervical spines (occiput–C7) were tested using an industrial robot. Pure moments that were a maximum of 1.5 Nm were applied in flexion-extension (FE), lateral bending (LB), and axial rotation (AR). The specimens were first tested in the intact state and followed by destabilization (a type II odontoid fracture) and fixation as follows: C1LM-C2PS, C1LM-C2TL, C1LM-C2/3TA, and C1LM-C2/3TACL. For each condition, the authors evaluated the range of motion and neutral zone across C1 and C2 in all directions.RESULTSCompared with the intact spine, each instrumented spine significantly increased in stability at the C1–2 segment. C1LM-C2TL fixation demonstrated similar stability in FE and LB and greater stability in AR than C1LM-C2PS fixation. C1LM-C2/3TA fixation was equivalent in LB and superior in FE to those of C1LM-C2PS and C1LM-C2TL fixation. During AR, the C1LM-C2/3TA–instrumented spine failed to maintain segmental stability. After adding a cross-link, the rotational stability was significantly increased in the C1LM-C2/3TACL–instrumented spine compared with the C1LM-C2/3TA–instrumented spine. Although inferior to C1LM-C2TL fixation, the C1LM-C2/3TACL–instrumented spine showed equivalent rotational stability to the C1LM-C2PS–instrumented spine.CONCLUSIONSOn the basis of our biomechanical study, C1LM-C2TL and C1LM-C2/3TACL fixation resulted in satisfactory atlantoaxial stabilization compared with C1LM-C2PS. Therefore, the authors believe that the C1LM-C2TL and C1LM-C2/3TACL fixation may serve as alternative procedures when the Goel-Harms technique (C1LM-C2PS) is not feasible due to anatomical constraints.

Sublaminar polyester bands as a salvage fixation method in the cervical spine: novel application in two patients

Pedicle and lateral mass screws are the most common means of rigid fixation in posterior cervical spine fusions. Various other techniques such as translaminar screw placement, paravertebral foramen screw fixation, sublaminar and spinous process wiring, cement augmentation, and others have been developed for primary fixation or as salvage methods. Use of these techniques can be limited by a prior history of osteotomies, poor bone density, destruction of the bone-screw interface, and unfavorable vascular and osseous anatomy.Here, the authors report on the novel application of cervical sublaminar polyester bands as an adjunct salvage method or additional fixation point used with traditional methods in the revision of prior constructs. While sublaminar polyester bands have been used for decades in pediatric scoliosis surgery in the thoracolumbar spine, they have yet to be utilized as a method of fixation in the cervical spine. In both cases described here, sublaminar banding proved crucial for fixation points where traditional fixation techniques would have been less than ideal. Further study is required to determine the full application of sublaminar polyester bands in the cervical spine as well as its outcomes.

C1-C2 screw fixation in the patient with anomalous course of vertebral artery: Case report

Introduction. The atlantoaxial complex is a very complicated structure and open reduction of C1-C2 subluxation is very demanding. Atlantoaxial instability may result from the traumatic, inflammatory, neoplastic, congenital or degenerative disorders. Anatomy of the vertebral artery is essential for surgical approach and sometimes the placement of C2 pedicle screw is not possible. In these instances, the translaminar screw placement in C2 can provide an alternative fixation point in C2, without threatening injury to the vertebral artery. Case report. We presented 54- year-old patient with cervical myelopathy according to traumatic atlantoaxial subluxation. Computed tomography angiography showed a bilateral vertebral artery anomaly of ?high-riding? type. The patient was operated and the posterior C1-C2 screws fixation was used. Due to the vertebral artery anomaly C2 screws were translaminary inserted. Complete reduction of C1-C2 subluxation and excellent neurological improvement were achieved. Conclusion. Surgical treatment of C1-C2 subluxation is very challenging. Many techniques of atlantoaxial fixation have been developed. The use of C2 translaminar screw is an alternative method of fixation in the treatment of atlantoaxial instability, especially in cases with the vertebral artery anomaly.

Differences in fixation strength among constructs of atlantoaxial fixation

OBJECTIVETo avoid jeopardizing an aberrant vertebral artery, there are three common options in placing a C2 screw, including pedicle, pars, and translaminar screws. Although biomechanical studies have demonstrated similar strength among these C2 screws in vitro, there are limited clinical data to address their differences in vivo. When different screws were placed in each side, few reports have compared the outcomes. The present study aimed to evaluate these multiple combinations of C2 screws.METHODSConsecutive adult patients who underwent posterior atlantoaxial (AA) fixation were retrospectively reviewed. Every patient uniformly had bilateral C1 lateral mass screws in conjunction with 2 C2 screws (1 C2 screw on each side chosen among the three options: pedicle, pars, or translaminar screws, based on individualized anatomical consideration). These patients were then grouped according to the different combinations of C2 screws for comparison of the outcomes.RESULTSA total of 63 patients were analyzed, with a mean follow-up of 34.3 months. There were five kinds of construct combinations of the C2 screws: 2 pedicle screws (the Ped-Ped group, n = 24), 2 translaminar screws (the La-La group, n = 7), 2 pars screws (the Pars-Pars group, n = 6), 1 pedicle and 1 pars screw (the Ped-Pars group, n = 7), and 1 pedicle and 1 translaminar screw (the Ped-La group, n = 19). The rate of successful fixation in each of the groups was 100%, 57.1%, 100%, 100%, and 78.9% (Ped-Ped, La-La, Par-Par, Ped-Par, and Ped-La, respectively). The patients who had no translaminar screw had a higher rate of success than those who had 1 or 2 translaminar screws (100% vs 73.1%, p = 0.0009). Among the 5 kinds of construct combinations, 2 C2 pedicle screws (the Ped-Ped group) had higher rates of success than 1 C2 pedicle and 1 C2 translaminar screw (the Ped-La group, p = 0.018). Overall, the rate of successful fixation was 87.3% (55/63). There were 7 patients (4 in the Ped-La group and 3 in the La-La group) who lost fixation/reduction, and they all had at least 1 translaminar screw.CONCLUSIONSIn AA fixation, C2 pedicle or pars screws or a combination of both provided very high success rates. Involvement of 1 or 2 C2 translaminar screws in the construct significantly lowered success rates. Therefore, a C2 pars screw is recommended over a translaminar screw.