Biomechanical effect of the C2 laminar decortication on the stability of C2 intralaminar screw construct and biomechanical comparison of C2 intralaminar screw and C2 pars screw

Jae Taek Hong, Tomoyuki Takigawa, Ranjith Udayakunmar, Hun Kyu Shin, Peter Simon, Alejandro A. Espinoza Orías, Nozomu Inoue, Howard S. An

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There have been no reports of biomechanical stability of C1-2 constructs after decortication of the C2 lamina. In addition, few studies have compared the stability of C2 laminar screw and pars screw constructs. OBJECTIVE: To compare the biomechanical stability of 3 different C1-2 construct conditions (C2 pars screw, C2 intralaminar screw, C2 intralaminar construct with C2 laminar decortication). METHODS: Fourteen fresh-frozen cadaveric cervical specimens (C1-3) were used. In 7 specimens, pure moments of 1.5 Nm were applied in flexion/extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation. Each specimen was tested in the normal state, in the destabilized state (after odontoidectomy and resection of transverse atlantal ligament), and after application of constructs. After kinematic study, these 7 specimens underwent axial pullout strength testing of pars screw and 50% decorticated C2 intralaminar screws. In another 7 specimens, insertion torque and pullout strength were measured to compare the pars screw and intact C2 intralaminar screw. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between the intact C2 intralaminar and 50% decorticated C2 intralaminar screw constructs in terms of range-of-motion limitations. The C2 pars screw construct was significantly superior to the C2 laminar screw construct in lateral bending (P <.01) and axial rotation (P <.01) and equivalent to the C2 laminar screw construct in flexion/extension (P = .42). There was no significant pullout strength difference between the 3 kinds of C2 screw. CONCLUSION: The C1 lateral mass-C2 pars screws construct was stronger than the C1 lateral mass-C2 intralaminar screw construct. Decortication of C2 laminar (up to 50%) did not affect the immediate stability of the C1-2 construct.

Original languageEnglish
JournalNeurosurgery
Volume69
Issue numberSUPPL. 1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Sep 2011
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Torque
Articular Range of Motion
Ligaments
Biomechanical Phenomena

Keywords

  • Atlantoaxial fixation
  • Biomechanics
  • Decortication
  • Intralaminar screw
  • Pars screw

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Neurology
  • Surgery

Cite this

Biomechanical effect of the C2 laminar decortication on the stability of C2 intralaminar screw construct and biomechanical comparison of C2 intralaminar screw and C2 pars screw. / Hong, Jae Taek; Takigawa, Tomoyuki; Udayakunmar, Ranjith; Shin, Hun Kyu; Simon, Peter; Espinoza Orías, Alejandro A.; Inoue, Nozomu; An, Howard S.

In: Neurosurgery, Vol. 69, No. SUPPL. 1, 09.2011.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Hong, Jae Taek ; Takigawa, Tomoyuki ; Udayakunmar, Ranjith ; Shin, Hun Kyu ; Simon, Peter ; Espinoza Orías, Alejandro A. ; Inoue, Nozomu ; An, Howard S. / Biomechanical effect of the C2 laminar decortication on the stability of C2 intralaminar screw construct and biomechanical comparison of C2 intralaminar screw and C2 pars screw. In: Neurosurgery. 2011 ; Vol. 69, No. SUPPL. 1.
@article{9eedfaa0c6c449df961f5d4dfd2a8ec8,
title = "Biomechanical effect of the C2 laminar decortication on the stability of C2 intralaminar screw construct and biomechanical comparison of C2 intralaminar screw and C2 pars screw",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: There have been no reports of biomechanical stability of C1-2 constructs after decortication of the C2 lamina. In addition, few studies have compared the stability of C2 laminar screw and pars screw constructs. OBJECTIVE: To compare the biomechanical stability of 3 different C1-2 construct conditions (C2 pars screw, C2 intralaminar screw, C2 intralaminar construct with C2 laminar decortication). METHODS: Fourteen fresh-frozen cadaveric cervical specimens (C1-3) were used. In 7 specimens, pure moments of 1.5 Nm were applied in flexion/extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation. Each specimen was tested in the normal state, in the destabilized state (after odontoidectomy and resection of transverse atlantal ligament), and after application of constructs. After kinematic study, these 7 specimens underwent axial pullout strength testing of pars screw and 50{\%} decorticated C2 intralaminar screws. In another 7 specimens, insertion torque and pullout strength were measured to compare the pars screw and intact C2 intralaminar screw. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between the intact C2 intralaminar and 50{\%} decorticated C2 intralaminar screw constructs in terms of range-of-motion limitations. The C2 pars screw construct was significantly superior to the C2 laminar screw construct in lateral bending (P <.01) and axial rotation (P <.01) and equivalent to the C2 laminar screw construct in flexion/extension (P = .42). There was no significant pullout strength difference between the 3 kinds of C2 screw. CONCLUSION: The C1 lateral mass-C2 pars screws construct was stronger than the C1 lateral mass-C2 intralaminar screw construct. Decortication of C2 laminar (up to 50{\%}) did not affect the immediate stability of the C1-2 construct.",
keywords = "Atlantoaxial fixation, Biomechanics, Decortication, Intralaminar screw, Pars screw",
author = "Hong, {Jae Taek} and Tomoyuki Takigawa and Ranjith Udayakunmar and Shin, {Hun Kyu} and Peter Simon and {Espinoza Or{\'i}as}, {Alejandro A.} and Nozomu Inoue and An, {Howard S.}",
year = "2011",
month = "9",
doi = "10.1227/NEU.0b013e3182155657",
language = "English",
volume = "69",
journal = "Neurosurgery",
issn = "0148-396X",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "SUPPL. 1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Biomechanical effect of the C2 laminar decortication on the stability of C2 intralaminar screw construct and biomechanical comparison of C2 intralaminar screw and C2 pars screw

AU - Hong, Jae Taek

AU - Takigawa, Tomoyuki

AU - Udayakunmar, Ranjith

AU - Shin, Hun Kyu

AU - Simon, Peter

AU - Espinoza Orías, Alejandro A.

AU - Inoue, Nozomu

AU - An, Howard S.

PY - 2011/9

Y1 - 2011/9

N2 - BACKGROUND: There have been no reports of biomechanical stability of C1-2 constructs after decortication of the C2 lamina. In addition, few studies have compared the stability of C2 laminar screw and pars screw constructs. OBJECTIVE: To compare the biomechanical stability of 3 different C1-2 construct conditions (C2 pars screw, C2 intralaminar screw, C2 intralaminar construct with C2 laminar decortication). METHODS: Fourteen fresh-frozen cadaveric cervical specimens (C1-3) were used. In 7 specimens, pure moments of 1.5 Nm were applied in flexion/extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation. Each specimen was tested in the normal state, in the destabilized state (after odontoidectomy and resection of transverse atlantal ligament), and after application of constructs. After kinematic study, these 7 specimens underwent axial pullout strength testing of pars screw and 50% decorticated C2 intralaminar screws. In another 7 specimens, insertion torque and pullout strength were measured to compare the pars screw and intact C2 intralaminar screw. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between the intact C2 intralaminar and 50% decorticated C2 intralaminar screw constructs in terms of range-of-motion limitations. The C2 pars screw construct was significantly superior to the C2 laminar screw construct in lateral bending (P <.01) and axial rotation (P <.01) and equivalent to the C2 laminar screw construct in flexion/extension (P = .42). There was no significant pullout strength difference between the 3 kinds of C2 screw. CONCLUSION: The C1 lateral mass-C2 pars screws construct was stronger than the C1 lateral mass-C2 intralaminar screw construct. Decortication of C2 laminar (up to 50%) did not affect the immediate stability of the C1-2 construct.

AB - BACKGROUND: There have been no reports of biomechanical stability of C1-2 constructs after decortication of the C2 lamina. In addition, few studies have compared the stability of C2 laminar screw and pars screw constructs. OBJECTIVE: To compare the biomechanical stability of 3 different C1-2 construct conditions (C2 pars screw, C2 intralaminar screw, C2 intralaminar construct with C2 laminar decortication). METHODS: Fourteen fresh-frozen cadaveric cervical specimens (C1-3) were used. In 7 specimens, pure moments of 1.5 Nm were applied in flexion/extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation. Each specimen was tested in the normal state, in the destabilized state (after odontoidectomy and resection of transverse atlantal ligament), and after application of constructs. After kinematic study, these 7 specimens underwent axial pullout strength testing of pars screw and 50% decorticated C2 intralaminar screws. In another 7 specimens, insertion torque and pullout strength were measured to compare the pars screw and intact C2 intralaminar screw. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between the intact C2 intralaminar and 50% decorticated C2 intralaminar screw constructs in terms of range-of-motion limitations. The C2 pars screw construct was significantly superior to the C2 laminar screw construct in lateral bending (P <.01) and axial rotation (P <.01) and equivalent to the C2 laminar screw construct in flexion/extension (P = .42). There was no significant pullout strength difference between the 3 kinds of C2 screw. CONCLUSION: The C1 lateral mass-C2 pars screws construct was stronger than the C1 lateral mass-C2 intralaminar screw construct. Decortication of C2 laminar (up to 50%) did not affect the immediate stability of the C1-2 construct.

KW - Atlantoaxial fixation

KW - Biomechanics

KW - Decortication

KW - Intralaminar screw

KW - Pars screw

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80051796968&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=80051796968&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1227/NEU.0b013e3182155657

DO - 10.1227/NEU.0b013e3182155657

M3 - Article

C2 - 21415794

AN - SCOPUS:80051796968

VL - 69

JO - Neurosurgery

JF - Neurosurgery

SN - 0148-396X

IS - SUPPL. 1

ER -