IntroductionThere are many ways to fuse the lumbar spine, and indications vary, especially concerning degenerative disorders. The fact that indications vary and often have not been sufficiently validated must, however, not draw our interest from the technical aspects of the procedure, which ideally involves minimal trauma, has few complications and yields a high fusion rate.The abundance of implants on the market and techniques used today further emphasize a need to evaluate Abstract The aim of the study was to design a method for evaluating the stabilizing effect of different lumbar spine implants in vivo, and to apply this method to a comparison of plates versus rods in lumbar spine posterolateral fusion using transpedicular screw fixation. Fourteen patients, seven operated on with transpedicular plates and screws (VSP), and seven operated on with rods and screws (Diapason), matched according to number of levels fused, had tantalum markers inserted in the vertebrae at surgery, enabling roentgen stereophotogrammetric analysis (RSA). Mean patient age was 45 (range 33-56) years. In each group, two patients underwent fusion between L4 and L5, three between L5 and S1, and two from L4 to S1. In three patients, concomitant nerve root decompression was performed using a facet joint preserving technique. RSA was performed 4 weeks after surgery. This interval was chosen to allow enough time for soft tissue healing, but not fusion healing, to occur. RSA was performed in supine and standing position without any mobility provocation, in line