A Biomechanical Comparison of Alternatives to C2 Pedicle Screws.

Qiang Jian^1,2, Weiwei Da^1,3, Jason DePhillips⁴, Joshua P McGuckin⁴, Izabella T Lachcik⁴, Nathanial A Myers^4,5, Jonathan M Mahoney⁴, Dean Chou¹, Brandon S Bucklen⁴

¹Department of Neurosurgery, Columbia University, New York, NY.

²Spine Center, Sanbo Brain Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing.

³Shanghai Municipal Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China.

⁴Scientific Affairs, Globus Medical Inc., Audubon.

⁵Department of Bioengineering, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA.

PubMed DOI

Abstract

STUDY DESIGN: Cadaveric biomechanics study. OBJECTIVE: This study compares five C2 fixation methods: pedicle, pars, translaminar, medial in-out-in, and subfacetal screws. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Variations in vascular and pedicle anatomy of the C2 vertebra can make C2 fixation difficult. Two novel trajectories-the medial in-out-in and subfacetal trajectory-may be alternatives. The medial in-…

Create a free account to keep reading

Free members get 10 full research views every month across publications, clinical trials, FDA clearances, adverse events, and NIH grants. No credit card required.

Create Free Account Sign In

Want unlimited research access? See Pro plans

Data Accuracy Notice: Research intelligence on Health AI Central is aggregated from public sources (PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, FDA, NIH, CMS, and others) and refreshed nightly. Classifications and derived metrics are produced by automated methods described in our Methodology. We recommend verifying critical data points against the primary sources before making decisions.