Hoffmann, R. A wiki for the life sciences where authorship matters. Nature Genetics (2008)

Editor

Personal info

View

About

Terms

Javascript disabled

Please enable Javascript support in your browser to use this application.

Instructions on how to enable JavaScript on different browsers can be found here: http://www.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=23852.

[edit this page]

Richter, M. et al.

Richter, Wilke, Kluger, Neller, Claes, Puhl,

Biomechanical evaluation of a new modular rod-screw implant system for posterior instrumentation of the occipito-cervical spine: in-vitro comparison with two established implant systems.

Posterior instrumentation of the occipito-cervical spine has become an established procedure in a variety of indications. The use of rod-screw systems improved posterior instrumentation as it allows optimal screw positioning adapted to the individual anatomic situation. However, there are still some drawbacks concerning the different implant designs. Therefore, a new modular rod-screw implant system has been developed to overcome some of the drawbacks of established systems. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether posterior internal fixation of the occipito-cervical spine with the new implant system improves primary biomechanical stability. Three different internal fixation systems were compared in this study: the CerviFix System, the Olerud Cervical Rod Spinal System and the newly developed Neon Occipito Cervical System. Eight human cervical spine CO/C5 specimens were instrumented from C0 to C4 with occipital fixation, transarticular screws in C1/C2 and lateral mass or pedicle screws in C3 and C4. The specimens were tested in flexion/extension, axial rotation, and lateral bending using pure moments of +/- 2.5 Nm without axial preload. After testing the intact spine, the different instrumentations were tested after destabilising C0/ C2 and C3/C4. Primary stability was significantly increased, in all load cases, with the new modular implant system compared to the other implant systems. Pedicle screw instrumentation tended to be more stable compared to lateral mass screws; nevertheless, significant differences were observed only for lateral bending. As the experimental design precluded any cyclic testing, the data represent only the primary stability of the implants. In summary, this study showed that posterior instrumentation of the cervical spine using the new Neon Occipito Cervical System improves primary biomechanical stability compared to the CerviFix System and the Olerud Cervical Rod Spinal System.[1]

References

Biomechanical evaluation of a new modular rod-screw implant system for posterior instrumentation of the occipito-cervical spine: in-vitro comparison with two established implant systems. Richter, M., Wilke, H.J., Kluger, P., Neller, S., Claes, L., Puhl, W. European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society. (2000) [Pubmed]

Annotations and hyperlinks in this abstract are from individual authors of WikiGenes or automatically generated by the WikiGenes Data Mining Engine. The abstract is from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.About WikiGenes Open Access Licence Privacy Policy Terms of Use apsburg

The world's first wiki where authorship really matters (Nature Genetics, 2008). Due credit and reputation for authors. Imagine a global collaborative knowledge base for original thoughts. Search thousands of articles and collaborate with scientists around the globe.