This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Letters to the Editor: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Letters to the Editor are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gurr, K. R.
Right arrow Articles by Shih, C. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Gurr, K. R.
Right arrow Articles by Shih, C. M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Vol 70, Issue 5 680-691, Copyright © 1988 by Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc

JOURNAL CONTENTS

Biomechanical analysis of posterior instrumentation systems after decompressive laminectomy. An unstable calf-spine model

KR Gurr, PC McAfee and CM Shih
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland 21205.

Mechanical non-destructive cyclical testing in rotation, axial compression, and flexion were performed on twelve fresh spinal segments from calves. Each segment contained five motion segments. Each spine was destabilized with bilateral laminectomy and facetectomy of the fourth and fifth lumbar vertebrae, resection of the pars interarticularis of the fourth lumbar vertebra, and resection of the disc between the fourth and fifth lumbar vertebrae. Sequential stabilization of each spine was used to compare the stiffness of: (1) Harrington distraction instrumentation of five levels, (2) Luque rectangular instrumentation of five levels, (3) modified Steffee transpedicular notched-rod instrumentation of three and five levels, and (4) Cotrel-Dubousset transpedicular instrumentation of three and five levels with and without transverse approximating rods. This in vitro study of a calf-spine model led to three reproducible conclusions: (1) after laminectomy and discectomy, the instrumented spine was more unstable in rotation and flexion than when it was subjected to axial compressive loads; (2) the most rigid implant was the Cotrel-Dubousset transpedicular instrumentation of five vertebral levels (p less than 0.05); and (3) with the Steffee or the Cotrel-Dubousset transpedicular instrumentation of three vertebral levels, it was possible to restore torsional, compressive, and flexural rigidity to the destabilized spine of the calf. Furthermore, transpedicular fixation of only three vertebral levels provided more in vitro stability than either traditional Harrington or Luque rectangular instrumentation, which require fixation of five vertebral levels to stabilize a spine after laminectomy.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J Bone Joint Surg BrHome page
D. Karataglis, G. Kapetanos, A. Lontos, A. Christodoulou, J. Christoforides, and J. Pournaras
The role of the dorsal vertebral cortex in the stability of transpedicular screws: A BIOMECHANICAL STUDY IN HUMAN CADAVERIC VERTEBRAE
J Bone Joint Surg Br, May 1, 2006; 88-B(5): 692 - 695.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]