Three-dimensional load displacement properties of posterior lumbar fixation

Pedicular fixation devices for the posterior treatment of segmental spinal instability are thought to offer enhanced stabilization compared with sublaminar wire systems, while avoiding the immobilization of multiple normal motion segments. We compared the performance of three dissimilar stabilization systems: the Hartshill rectangle, the Acromed/Steffee interpedicular screw and plate, and the Synthes/Dick fixateur interne. Human cadaveric lumbosacral specimens were first tested intact, then after a laminectomy and a facetectomy at the L3/L4 level, and finally after the fixation devices were sequentially attached. Constructs spanning two to four vertebral levels were compared for stabilization of the resected lumbar spine segments. When tested in compression, the Acromed/Steffee system with pedicular screws at L2-L5 allowed significantly less intersegmental distraction than the Synthes/Dick construct with screws at L2 and L5 only, and less than the intact and the destabilized uninstrumented spine. When sagittally rotated, the Acromed/Steffee construct with screws at L2-L5, or at L2 and L5, allowed significantly less distraction than the intact or destabilized segments, and the construct with screws at L2 through L5 allowed less distraction than the Synthes/Dick constructs with screws at L3/L4 or L2/L5. With the exception of the Acromed/Steffee system with screws at four levels, there were no significant differences in distraction allowed between the Synthes/Dick and Acromed/Steffee constructs, or between the multisegment and single segment constructs. There were no significant differences in stiffness across levels L3/L4 with the various implants. Results indicate that the use of posterior spine constructs significantly augment the stability of posterior segmental defects. Pedicular fixation immediately cephalad and caudad to the defect provided stable fixation in this application.