2000
DOI: 10.1097/00007632-200011150-00007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Biomechanical Comparison of Five Different Atlantoaxial Posterior Fixation Techniques

Abstract: The current findings substantiate the use of three-point fixation as the treatment of choice for C1-C2 instability. [l: atlantoaxial fixation, biomechanics, cervical spine, instability, spinal instrumentation, transarticular screws]

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

1
68
0
3

Year Published

2001
2001
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
6
3
1

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 137 publications
(72 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
1
68
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…(2) This method obviates the procedure of removing posterior failed instrument first, while direct anterior release followed by posterior reduction and instrumentation is indicated. Several instrumentations have been described in the literature [14]. Anterior instruments placed on the pharyngeal wall predispose the risk of local infection; as a result, anterior screw loosening has been reported [11].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(2) This method obviates the procedure of removing posterior failed instrument first, while direct anterior release followed by posterior reduction and instrumentation is indicated. Several instrumentations have been described in the literature [14]. Anterior instruments placed on the pharyngeal wall predispose the risk of local infection; as a result, anterior screw loosening has been reported [11].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…3). Bilateral transarticular screws lay a solid foundation for the internal fixation [17][18][19][20][21][22] and the hook system serves as a measure to fix the bone graft through pressing. An additional hook system on the intact side, instead of wiring, was adopted which had advantages [23][24][25] of (1) more stability as a supplement to bilateral transarticular screws in restricting the flexion-extension, (2) more safety without passing wires though the arch, and (3) higher efficiency in securing the structural bone graft with a longer torque pressing the posterior arch as compared with C1 lateral mass screw.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These have evolved from posterior wiring techniques of Brooks, Gallie and Sonntag to screw fixation techniques. The Magerl transarticular technique provides significant fixation advantages over wiring techniques and up to a 100% fusion rate [5,[7][8][9]11]. However, anatomical reduction of C1 on C2 prior to screw insertion is required and there is potential for inadvertent vertebral artery injury [12].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%