2006
DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000225997.41924.eb
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Biomechanical Comparison of the Screw-Bone Interface: Optimization of 1 and 2 Screw Constructs by Varying Screw Diameter

Abstract: Failure modes for 1-screw constructs almost entirely (89%) showed gradual plowing through the bone, whereas acute fracture through the vertebral body or pedicles were common forms of failure (85%) for 2-screw constructs.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0
3

Year Published

2008
2008
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
2
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…This mode of failure has been seen clinically in anterior and posterior methods of deformity correction and has been demonstrated biomechanically with anterior instrumentation. 6,7 To accommodate this limitation of monoaxial screws while maintaining rotational control, uniaxial screws that allow for cranial-caudal variability between the screw shaft and tulip have been developed. 8 The touted advantage of this type of screw is that it allows for rotational control of the vertebra while still allowing for some variability in the cranial-caudal placement angle of the screw.…”
Section: Biomechanical Comparison Of Endplate Forces Generated By Unimentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This mode of failure has been seen clinically in anterior and posterior methods of deformity correction and has been demonstrated biomechanically with anterior instrumentation. 6,7 To accommodate this limitation of monoaxial screws while maintaining rotational control, uniaxial screws that allow for cranial-caudal variability between the screw shaft and tulip have been developed. 8 The touted advantage of this type of screw is that it allows for rotational control of the vertebra while still allowing for some variability in the cranial-caudal placement angle of the screw.…”
Section: Biomechanical Comparison Of Endplate Forces Generated By Unimentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The ideal starting point for screw insertion has previously been considered to be just anterior to the head of the rib at each level (Mohamad et al, 2006). However, the position of the rib head is varied in the thoracic spine, so the actual starting position of the screw insertion should be dependent on the level of the thoracic vertebrae in which the screws are placed.…”
Section: -D Measurementsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…O teste de arrancamento é normalmente o mais utilizado para avaliar a capacidade de fixação do parafuso pedicular (VISHNUBHOTLA et al, 2011). Entretanto outros testes, como o teste de torque, teste de torção, teste de alternância ou carga cíclica são utilizados, mas com menor frequência (BECKER et al, 2008;COOK et al, 2000COOK et al, , 2004MAHAR et al, 2006;MOHAMAD et al, 2006;WHITE et al, 2006;WITTENBERG et al, 1991).…”
Section: Testes Biomecânicosunclassified
“…Tentativas de melhorar a relação mecânica da interface osso-implante no parafuso pedicular é matéria de inúmeros estudos há mais de 30 anos (AGHAYEV et al, 2014;ASNIS et al, 1996;BECKER et al, 2008;BIANCO et al, 2014;BRANTLEY et al, 1994;BRASILIENSE et al, 2013;COOK et al, 2004;GLASSMAN et al, 1995;HELGESON et al, 2013;HIRANO et al, 1997;KRENN et al, 2008;LIN et al, 2003;MEHTA et al, 2012;MOHAMAD et al, 2006;MOORE et al, 1997;RENNER et al, 2004;SKINNER et al, 1990;VACCARO et al, 1995;WILLETT et al, 1993;YAMAGATA et al, 1992). Em todos, o consenso é que a fixação primária, ou seja, a que acontece sem a interferência biológica do osso, depende de três fatores, o desenho do parafuso, as propriedades do osso, e a técnica utilizada pelo cirurgião (COOK et al, 2004).…”
Section: Influência Do Desenho Do Parafusounclassified
See 1 more Smart Citation