Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 24, 2026
Minimally Invasive Treatment for Thoracolumbar Burst Fracture Using Sagittal Alignment Screws and A Trauma Reduction Device
Published on: November 8, 2024
A cadaveric analysis of cervical fixation: the effect of intermediate fixation points and dynamization in multilevel
Daniel Lubelski1, William E McCormick, Lisa Ferrara
1Center for Spine Health and.
Object:
The authors conducted a study to compare biomechanical effects on the cervical spine of bridging fixation and intermediate fixation techniques, in both fixed and dynamic modes.
Methods:
A biaxial, servohydraulic machine biomechanically tested 23 human cervical spines for stiffness and strain in compression, extension, flexion, and lateral bending through 3 specimen states: 1) intact, 2) defect (corpectomy and discectomy), and 3) grafting with plate application in 1 of 4 constructs: C3-7 dynamized long strut (DLS), C3-7 fixed long strut (FLS), C3-5-7 dynamized multisegment (DMS), and C3-5-7 fixed multisegment (FMS).
Results:
Compared with FMS, FLS had significantly greater strain in extension (at C-3 and at the rostral and caudal parts of the graft) and in lateral bending (at C-3 and at the caudal part of the graft). Fixed (FLS and FMS) constructs had greater flexion stiffness than did dynamized (DLS and DMS) constructs and showed a trend toward greater lateral bending stiffness. Instrumentation revealed greater extension strain with the long fixed (FLS and DLS) constructs than with the multifixed (FMS and FMS) constructs at the rostral and caudal parts of the graft but no significant differences between the dynamized (DLS and DMS) and fixed (FLS and FMS) constructs.
Conclusions:
Multisegmental fixation provided greater stabilizing forces than did bridging constructs for both dynamized and fixed plates. Use of multisegmental fixation can potentially decrease strain at the screw-plate interface and reduce the rate of hardware failure.
