• Marco D Burkhard, Frédéric Cornaz, José Miguel Spirig, Florian Wanivenhaus, Marie-Rosa Fasser, Jonas Widmer, and Mazda Farshad.
• Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Balgrist University Hospital, University of Zurich, Forchstrasse 340, 8008, Zurich, Switzerland. marco.burkhard@balgrist.ch.
• Eur Spine J. 2023 Apr 1; 32 (4): 140114101401-1410.

PurposeTo compare the residual range of motion (ROM) of cortical screw (CS) versus pedicle screw (PS) instrumented lumbar segments and the additional effect of transforaminal interbody fusion (TLIF) and cross-link (CL) augmentation.MethodsROM of thirty-five human cadaver lumbar segments in flexion/extension (FE), lateral bending (LB), lateral shear (LS), anterior shear (AS), axial rotation (AR), and axial compression (AC) was recorded. After instrumenting the segments with PS (n = 17) and CS (n = 18), ROM in relation to the uninstrumented segments was evaluated without and with CL augmentation before and after decompression and TLIF.ResultsCS and PS instrumentations both significantly reduced ROM in all loading directions, except AC. In undecompressed segments, a significantly lower relative (and absolute) reduction of motion in LB was found with CS 61% (absolute 3.3°) as compared to PS 71% (4.0°; p = 0.048). FE, AR, AS, LS, and AC values were similar between CS and PS instrumented segments without interbody fusion. After decompression and TLIF insertion, no difference between CS and PS was found in LB and neither in any other loading direction. CL augmentation did not diminish differences in LB between CS and PS in the undecompressed state but led to an additional small AR reduction of 11% (0.15°) in CS and 7% (0.05°) in PS instrumentation.ConclusionSimilar residual motion is found with CS and PS instrumentation, except of slightly, but significantly inferior reduction of ROM in LB with CS. Differences between CS and PS in diminish with TLIF but not with CL augmentation.© 2023. The Author(s).

15 keywords...

hide…