Biomechanical assessment of anchored cervical interbody cages: comparison of 2-screw and 4-screw designs.
biomechanical · Level V
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 24662505.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1227/NEU.0000000000000351.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
A new anchored cervical interbody polyetheretherketone spacer was devised that uses only 2 integrated variable-angle screws diagonally into the adjacent vertebral bodies instead of the established device that uses 4 diagonal fixed-angle screws. To compare in vitro the stability provided by the new 2-screw interbody spacer with that of the 4-screw spacer and a 4-screw anterior plate plus independent polyetheretherketone spacer. Three groups of cadaveric specimens were tested with 2-screw anchored cage (n = 8), 4-screw anchored cage (n = 8), and standard plate/cage (n = 16). Pure moments (1.5 Nm) were applied to induce flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation while measuring 3-D motion optoelectronically. In all 3 groups, the mean range of motion (ROM) and lax zone were significantly reduced relative to the intact spine after discectomy and fixation. The 2-screw anchored cage allowed significantly greater ROM (P < .05) than the standard plate during flexion, extension, and axial rotation and allowed significantly greater ROM than the 4-screw cage during extension and axial rotation. The 4-screw anchored cage did not allow significantly different ROM or lax zone than the standard plate during any loading mode. The 2-screw variable-angle anchored cage significantly reduces ROM relative to the intact spine. Greater stability can be achieved, especially during extension and axial rotation, by using the 4-screw cage or standard plate plus cage.
Medical subject headings
- Bone Screws
- Cervical Vertebrae
- Spinal Fusion