ArticleJournal of spine surgery (Hong Kong)2024
A comparative cadaveric biomechanical study of bilateral FacetFuse
Article in Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Achieving optimal immediate stability is crucial in lumbar fusion surgeries. Traditionally, four pedicle screws have been utilized to provide posterior stability at the L5-S1 level. However, the use of bilateral transfacet pedicle screws (TFPS) as an alternative construct has shown promising results in terms of biomechanical stability. This research paper investigates the biomechanical stability of TFPS with a lag design in comparison to equivalent-sized unilateral or bilateral fully threaded pedicle screw-rod (PSR) constructs at the L5-S1 disc level. The study assesses the immediate stability achieved by these constructs which have clinical implications in achieving lumbar segment fusion. We hypothesized that bilateral TFPS will yield immediate lumbar fixation that is comparable to unilateral or bilateral PSR constructs. Methods: Cadaveric biomechanical testing was conducted Results: Fourteen specimens were analyzed with an average age of 53.14±10.99 years and comparable bone mineral density. TFPS demonstrated a reduced ROM that was notably lower than that of unilateral PSR in all loading modes and was comparable to bilateral PSR, especially in extension and axial rotation (AR). The unilateral and bilateral PSR groups differed notably in lateral bending (LB) and AR. Conclusions: Bilateral TFPS demonstrated superior immediate stability than unilateral PSR and was an equivalent substitute to bilateral PSR constructs at the L5-S1 disc level. Further clinical investigations are necessary to validate these results and ascertain the long-term outcomes and advantages associated with the use of bilateral TFPS as an alternative construct. Our findings showed that bilateral TFPS could potentially reduce the number of required pedicle screws while achieving comparable stability in lumbar fusion procedures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.