Christopher T Martin, Deb A Bhowmick, Vincent Rossi, Domagoj Coric, Martin H Pham, Amber Schweitzer, Daniel Woods, Jeremy J Rawlinson
{"title":"颈椎椎弓根入口螺钉:与侧块螺钉相比,导航亚轴颈椎螺钉放置的新轨迹具有更好的生物力学特性。","authors":"Christopher T Martin, Deb A Bhowmick, Vincent Rossi, Domagoj Coric, Martin H Pham, Amber Schweitzer, Daniel Woods, Jeremy J Rawlinson","doi":"10.1177/21925682251352439","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Study DesignCadaveric Biomechanical.ObjectiveTo investigate the biomechanical characteristics of a new screw trajectory, which we have deemed the \"pedicle inlet\" trajectory.MethodsFour surgeons familiar with standard and image-guided cervical pedicle screw fixation techniques placed 3.5 mm diameter cervical fixation screws randomized at each sub-axial level to one of three fixation techniques: cervical pedicle, pedicle inlet, and lateral mass screw. A total of 180 screws were placed from C3 to C7 in 18 cadaveric spine samples. Maximal insertional torque was measured during the final seating of the screws. After confirmation of accuracy of screws with post-procedural CT-imaging, individual screws in the cadaveric samples were biomechanically tested for pull-out strength.ResultsAll screws were placed without breach into neurovascular spaces. The final insertional torque was equivalent (ANOVA, <i>P</i> > .05, 3.6 ± 1.7 Nm) across cervical pedicle screws, pedicle inlet, and lateral mass screws. Maximal pullout strength was observed for cervical pedicle screws (814.6 ± 387.3 N). Pedicle inlet screws had a 51% higher pullout strength as compared to lateral mass screws (593.2 ± 289.9 N v 392.4 ± 284.0 N, <i>P</i> < .01). All differences were statistically distinct from each other (ANOVA, <i>P</i> < .01).ConclusionsUse of image-guidance allows for safe placement along the pedicle inlet trajectory, with no recorded screw malposition, and a 51% improvement in pull out strength as compared to lateral mass screws. The pedicle inlet trajectory offers an alternative to traditional lateral mass screws with better fixation quality and may have particular application in percutaneous or minimally invasive posterior fusions.</p>","PeriodicalId":12680,"journal":{"name":"Global Spine Journal","volume":" ","pages":"21925682251352439"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12237946/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cervical Pedicle Inlet Screws: A Novel Trajectory for Navigated Sub-axial Cervical Screw Placement With Improved Biomechanical Characteristics Compared to Lateral Mass Screws.\",\"authors\":\"Christopher T Martin, Deb A Bhowmick, Vincent Rossi, Domagoj Coric, Martin H Pham, Amber Schweitzer, Daniel Woods, Jeremy J Rawlinson\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/21925682251352439\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Study DesignCadaveric Biomechanical.ObjectiveTo investigate the biomechanical characteristics of a new screw trajectory, which we have deemed the \\\"pedicle inlet\\\" trajectory.MethodsFour surgeons familiar with standard and image-guided cervical pedicle screw fixation techniques placed 3.5 mm diameter cervical fixation screws randomized at each sub-axial level to one of three fixation techniques: cervical pedicle, pedicle inlet, and lateral mass screw. A total of 180 screws were placed from C3 to C7 in 18 cadaveric spine samples. Maximal insertional torque was measured during the final seating of the screws. After confirmation of accuracy of screws with post-procedural CT-imaging, individual screws in the cadaveric samples were biomechanically tested for pull-out strength.ResultsAll screws were placed without breach into neurovascular spaces. The final insertional torque was equivalent (ANOVA, <i>P</i> > .05, 3.6 ± 1.7 Nm) across cervical pedicle screws, pedicle inlet, and lateral mass screws. Maximal pullout strength was observed for cervical pedicle screws (814.6 ± 387.3 N). Pedicle inlet screws had a 51% higher pullout strength as compared to lateral mass screws (593.2 ± 289.9 N v 392.4 ± 284.0 N, <i>P</i> < .01). All differences were statistically distinct from each other (ANOVA, <i>P</i> < .01).ConclusionsUse of image-guidance allows for safe placement along the pedicle inlet trajectory, with no recorded screw malposition, and a 51% improvement in pull out strength as compared to lateral mass screws. The pedicle inlet trajectory offers an alternative to traditional lateral mass screws with better fixation quality and may have particular application in percutaneous or minimally invasive posterior fusions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12680,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Spine Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"21925682251352439\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12237946/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Spine Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/21925682251352439\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Spine Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/21925682251352439","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
研究设计:尸体生物力学。目的探讨一种新型“椎弓根入口”螺钉轨迹的生物力学特性。方法4名熟悉标准和图像引导下颈椎椎弓根螺钉固定技术的外科医生将直径3.5 mm的颈椎螺钉随机放置在每个亚轴位,固定技术为颈椎椎弓根、椎弓根入口和侧块螺钉。在18个尸体脊柱样本中,从C3到C7共放置180颗螺钉。最大插入扭矩在螺钉的最终安装过程中测量。在术后ct成像确认螺钉的准确性后,对尸体样本中的单个螺钉进行生物力学拉力测试。结果所有螺钉置入均无破入神经血管间隙。颈椎椎弓根螺钉、椎弓根入口螺钉和侧块螺钉的最终插入扭矩相等(方差分析,P < 0.05, 3.6±1.7 Nm)。颈椎椎弓根螺钉最大拉力为814.6±387.3 N。椎弓根入口螺钉的拉出强度比侧块螺钉高51%(593.2±289.9 N vs 392.4±284.0 N, P < 0.01)。差异均有统计学意义(方差分析,P < 0.01)。结论使用图像引导可以沿椎弓根入口轨迹安全放置,无螺钉错位记录,与侧块螺钉相比,拔出强度提高51%。椎弓根入口轨迹提供了传统侧块螺钉的替代方案,具有更好的固定质量,在经皮或微创后路融合中可能具有特殊的应用。
Cervical Pedicle Inlet Screws: A Novel Trajectory for Navigated Sub-axial Cervical Screw Placement With Improved Biomechanical Characteristics Compared to Lateral Mass Screws.
Study DesignCadaveric Biomechanical.ObjectiveTo investigate the biomechanical characteristics of a new screw trajectory, which we have deemed the "pedicle inlet" trajectory.MethodsFour surgeons familiar with standard and image-guided cervical pedicle screw fixation techniques placed 3.5 mm diameter cervical fixation screws randomized at each sub-axial level to one of three fixation techniques: cervical pedicle, pedicle inlet, and lateral mass screw. A total of 180 screws were placed from C3 to C7 in 18 cadaveric spine samples. Maximal insertional torque was measured during the final seating of the screws. After confirmation of accuracy of screws with post-procedural CT-imaging, individual screws in the cadaveric samples were biomechanically tested for pull-out strength.ResultsAll screws were placed without breach into neurovascular spaces. The final insertional torque was equivalent (ANOVA, P > .05, 3.6 ± 1.7 Nm) across cervical pedicle screws, pedicle inlet, and lateral mass screws. Maximal pullout strength was observed for cervical pedicle screws (814.6 ± 387.3 N). Pedicle inlet screws had a 51% higher pullout strength as compared to lateral mass screws (593.2 ± 289.9 N v 392.4 ± 284.0 N, P < .01). All differences were statistically distinct from each other (ANOVA, P < .01).ConclusionsUse of image-guidance allows for safe placement along the pedicle inlet trajectory, with no recorded screw malposition, and a 51% improvement in pull out strength as compared to lateral mass screws. The pedicle inlet trajectory offers an alternative to traditional lateral mass screws with better fixation quality and may have particular application in percutaneous or minimally invasive posterior fusions.
期刊介绍:
Global Spine Journal (GSJ) is the official scientific publication of AOSpine. A peer-reviewed, open access journal, devoted to the study and treatment of spinal disorders, including diagnosis, operative and non-operative treatment options, surgical techniques, and emerging research and clinical developments.GSJ is indexed in PubMedCentral, SCOPUS, and Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI).