ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2025
Odontoid process type II and III fracture fixation using bone allograft screws versus cannulated screws: a biomechanical study.
Article in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionFractures of the odontoid process are associated with high non-union rates, challenging treatment, and high incidence of screw-related complications. The aim of this study was to compare the biomechanical competence of a single biointegrative bone allograft screw versus two conventional cannulated screws for odontoid fracture fixation. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe odontoid process of intact C2 vertebral specimens was subjected to quasi-static loading until fracture. Specimens with an Anderson and d'Alonzo type II or III fracture (n = 47) were fixated with either two conventional cannulated screws or with a single bone allograft screw. The constructs were biomechanically tested to failure in the same fashion as in their intact state. Stiffness, yield, and ultimate load were evaluated. The results were adjusted by age, sex, volumetric bone mineral density (vBMD), and the cross-sectional area ratio of cortical bone to total bone measured at the junction of the odontoid process with the vertebral body (Ct.Ar/Tt.Ar).
resultsStiffness, yield and ultimate load were restored in the cannulated screws group by 44 ± 10%, 46 ± 7%, and 46 ± 5% and in the bone allograft group by 50 ± 12%, 30 ± 9%, and 34 ± 6% (mean ± SE). There were no significant differences between the groups regarding the three mechanical outcomes (0.104 ≤ p ≤ 0.223). Positive significant relation was found between vBMD and stiffness in each group (0.248 ≤ R²≤0.273, 0.018 ≤ p ≤ 0.038), as well as between Ct.Ar/Tt.Ar and stiffness (R²=0.218, p = 0.033), vBMD and ultimate load (R²=0.430, p = 0.001) and ultimate loadand vBMD (R²=0.315, p = 0.010) in the cannulated screws group.
conclusionsThe primary stability of odontoid fracture fixation is determined mainly by the quality of the local bone and independent of the fixation technique. From the biomechanical perspective, the lower mean values for the yield and ultimate load restored in the bone allograft group compared to the cannulated screws group should be compensated by lower peak load during the patient's rehabilitation process.
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.