2003
DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2003.08.021
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Lateral mass screw–rod fixation of the cervical spine: a prospective clinical series with 1-year follow-up

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

2
67
0
1

Year Published

2008
2008
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 68 publications
(70 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
2
67
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Hence, a surgical strategy in which posterior reduction of local kyphosis using a posterior screw system [6][7][8][9][10] is performed in addition to LP should be considered, as it has been reported that posterior instrumentation such as lateral mass screw and pedicle screw assures stronger fixation compared to anterior plating in biomechanical tests [11,12]. However, there is no comparative study of the outcome between LP alone and posterior reconstruction surgery using a screw-rod system (PR) for CSM patients with accompanying local kyphosis.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Hence, a surgical strategy in which posterior reduction of local kyphosis using a posterior screw system [6][7][8][9][10] is performed in addition to LP should be considered, as it has been reported that posterior instrumentation such as lateral mass screw and pedicle screw assures stronger fixation compared to anterior plating in biomechanical tests [11,12]. However, there is no comparative study of the outcome between LP alone and posterior reconstruction surgery using a screw-rod system (PR) for CSM patients with accompanying local kyphosis.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although lateral mass screw fixation in the cervical spine has been shown to provide excellent stability and high rates of fusion in adult patients, 8,14,16 little has been published about the use of subaxial lateral mass screws in the pediatric age group. In this age group, unlike the adult age group, there have been limited cadaveric biomechanical analyses of these types of constructs.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Lateral mass screw insertion has been shown to be reliable with minimal risk to the spinal cord because screws are directed away from the cord. 18 Neurological injury with lateral mass screws are usually nerve root injuries, occurring at a rate of 1.3-1.8%. 18,36 Pedicle screws placed at C-7 are also safe; Vaccaro et al 1,3 showed no occurrence of SCI when screws were placed in conjunction with a laminoforaminotomy.…”
Section: Surgical Causes Of Posci In the Cervical Spinementioning
confidence: 99%
“…18 Neurological injury with lateral mass screws are usually nerve root injuries, occurring at a rate of 1.3-1.8%. 18,36 Pedicle screws placed at C-7 are also safe; Vaccaro et al 1,3 showed no occurrence of SCI when screws were placed in conjunction with a laminoforaminotomy. The use of transarticular screws at C1-2, although a technically demanding procedure, has been shown to be a safe method of fusion, with several authors demonstrating no occurrence of cord injury.…”
Section: Surgical Causes Of Posci In the Cervical Spinementioning
confidence: 99%