A Plate–Rod Device for Treatment of Cervicothoracic Disorders: Comparison of Mechanical Testing with Established Cervical Spine In Vitro Load Testing Data

Vaccaro, R; Rf, Conant; As, Hilibrand; Tj, Albert

doi:10.1097/00002517-200008000-00013

Cited by 24 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Numerous posterior plate systems have been successfully employed in stabilization of the CTJ. 15,27 However, in our series, the transition from cervical plate systems to a 3.0-or 3.5-mm rod system was initially made due to the high failure rate (29%) associated with the cervical plate system. The inability to constrain the screw to the plate led to a high rate of screw pullout.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Posterior stabilization strategies following resection of cervicothoracic junction tumors: review of 90 consecutive cases

Placantonakis

Laufer

Wang³

et al. 2008

SPI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Object In this retrospective analysis the authors describe the assessment and outcomes of 90 patients who underwent placement of posterior instrumentation at the cervicothoracic junction following the resection of a primary or metastatic tumor during a 10-year period. Methods All patients underwent a posterolateral laminectomy including uni- or bilateral facetectomy, and 44 patients additionally required vertebral body resection and reconstruction. In patients who underwent C-6 or C-7 decompression, the posterior instrumentation strategies changed from the use of lateral mass plate systems (LMPSs) to lateral mass screw/rod systems (LMSRSs). Similarly, for T1–3 tumor decompression, the strategy shifted from sublaminar hook/rod systems (SHRSs) to the use of pedicle screw systems (PSSs) in which the surgeon used either a 6.25-mm rod or dual-diameter rods with or without a connector. Results The overall surgical complication rate was 19% including fixation failure in 11 patients (12%), 6 of whom required reoperation. Fixation failure rates for cervical decompression decreased from 2 (29%) of 7 patients in the LMPS group to 0 (0%) of 8 in the LMSRS group (p = 0.2). The fixation failure rates for thoracic decompression were 7 (15%) of 48 patients in the SHRS group, and there was a decrease to 2 (7%) of 27 in the PSS group (p = 0.48). Neurological and functional outcomes including American Spinal Injury Association, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group, and Medical Research Council muscle strength and pain scores remained stable or improved in 94, 96, 100, and 96% of patients, respectively. Conclusions Current posterior instrumentation strategies involving LMSRSs and PSSs provide excellent and safe stabilization of the cervicothoracic junction following resection of primary or metastatic tumors.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Posterior stabilization strategies following resection of cervicothoracic junction tumors: review of 90 consecutive cases

Placantonakis

Laufer

Wang³

et al. 2008

SPI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although extensive research has been performed on stabilization of the cervical spine, 1-17 there remains a paucity of published data on instrumentation at the cervicothoracic junction. [18][19][20][21][22][23][24] Only 3 prior biomechanical studies have specifically addressed the cervicothoracic junction. [22][23][24] In 1995, Bueff et al 24 showed posterior instrumentation was statistically stiffer than anterior plates when instrumenting C6-T2 in a human cadaver model with a 2-column injury at C7/T1.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[18][19][20][21][22][23][24] Only 3 prior biomechanical studies have specifically addressed the cervicothoracic junction. [22][23][24] In 1995, Bueff et al 24 showed posterior instrumentation was statistically stiffer than anterior plates when instrumenting C6-T2 in a human cadaver model with a 2-column injury at C7/T1. In 2000, Vaccaro et al 23 reported a biomechanical analysis of a posterior combination plate-rod construct using ultra high molecular weight polyethylene blocks to simulate the cervicothoracic junction.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[22][23][24] In 1995, Bueff et al 24 showed posterior instrumentation was statistically stiffer than anterior plates when instrumenting C6-T2 in a human cadaver model with a 2-column injury at C7/T1. In 2000, Vaccaro et al 23 reported a biomechanical analysis of a posterior combination plate-rod construct using ultra high molecular weight polyethylene blocks to simulate the cervicothoracic junction. These results were found to be comparable with established data on the Roy-Camille posterior cervical fixation system.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Despite the fact that stabilization of the cervicothoracic junction is commonly required for instances of trauma, tumors, congenital deformities, and postlaminectomy conditions, only 4 18-21 clinical and 3 biomechanical [22][23][24] publications have been reported to date specifically pertaining to instrumentation of the cervicothoracic junction. Treating unstable conditions with instrumentation at the cervicothoracic junction is challenging.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A Comparative Biomechanical Analysis of Spinal Instability and Instrumentation of the Cervicothoracic Junction

Prybis¹,

Tortolani²,

Hu³

et al. 2007

Journal of Spinal Disorders &Amp; Techniques

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Wirbelsäule: Implantate und Revisionen

Krieg

Meyer

2016

Chirurg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Non-fusion spinal implants are designed to reduce the commonly occurring risks and complications of spinal fusion surgery, e.g. long duration of surgery, high blood loss, screw loosening and adjacent segment disease, by dynamic or movement preserving approaches. This principle could be shown for interspinous spacers, cervical and lumbar total disc replacement and dynamic stabilization; however, due to the continuing high rate of revision surgery, the indications for surgery require as much attention and evidence as comparative data on the surgical technique itself.

show abstract

A Plate–Rod Device for Treatment of Cervicothoracic Disorders: Comparison of Mechanical Testing with Established Cervical Spine In Vitro Load Testing Data

Cited by 24 publications

References 25 publications

Posterior stabilization strategies following resection of cervicothoracic junction tumors: review of 90 consecutive cases

Posterior stabilization strategies following resection of cervicothoracic junction tumors: review of 90 consecutive cases

A Comparative Biomechanical Analysis of Spinal Instability and Instrumentation of the Cervicothoracic Junction

Wirbelsäule: Implantate und Revisionen

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About