Biomechanical analysis of occipitocervical stabilization techniques: emphasis on integrity of osseous structures at the occipital implantation sites

View More View Less
  • 1 Musculoskeletal Education Center, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, MedStar Union Memorial Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland;
  • 2 Department of Neurosurgery, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC; and
  • 3 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Tianjin Hospital, Tianjin, China
Restricted access

Purchase Now

USD  $45.00

Spine - 1 year subscription bundle (Individuals Only)

USD  $369.00

JNS + Pediatrics + Spine - 1 year subscription bundle (Individuals Only)

USD  $600.00
Print or Print + Online

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the current study was to quantify and compare the multidirectional flexibility properties of occipital anchor fixation with conventional methods of occipitocervical screw fixation using nondestructive and destructive investigative methods.

METHODS

Fourteen cadaveric occipitocervical specimens (Oc–T2) were randomized to reconstruction with occipital anchors or an occipital plate and screws. Using a 6-degree-of-freedom spine simulator with moments of ± 2.0 Nm, initial multidirectional flexibility analysis of the intact and reconstructed conditions was performed followed by fatigue loading of 25,000 cycles of flexion-extension (x-axis, ± 2.0 Nm), 15,000 cycles of lateral bending (z-axis, ± 2.0 Nm), and 10,000 cycles of axial rotation (y-axis, ± 2.0 Nm). Fluoroscopic images of the implantation sites were obtained before and after fatigue testing and placed on an x-y coordinate system to quantify positional stability of the anchors and screws used for reconstruction and effect, if any, of the fatigue component. Destructive testing included an anterior flexural load to construct failure. Quantification of implant, occipitocervical, and atlantoaxial junction range of motion is reported as absolute values, and peak flexural failure moment in Newton-meters (Nm).

RESULTS

Absolute value comparisons between the intact condition and 2 reconstruction groups demonstrated significant reductions in segmental flexion-extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation motion at the Oc–C1 and C1–2 junctions (p < 0.05). The average bone mineral density at the midline keel (1.422 g/cm3) was significantly higher compared with the lateral occipital region at 0.671 g/cm3 (p < 0.05). There were no significant differences between the occipital anchor and plate treatments in terms of angular rotation (degrees; p = 0.150) or x-axis displacement (mm; p = 0.572), but there was a statistically significant difference in y-axis displacement (p = 0.031) based on quantitative analysis of the pre- and postfatigue fluoroscopic images (p > 0.05). Under destructive anterior flexural loading, the occipital anchor group failed at 90 ± 31 Nm, and the occipital plate group failed at 79 ± 25 Nm (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Both reconstructions reduced flexion-extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation at the occipitocervical and atlantoaxial junctions, as expected. Flexural load to failure did not differ significantly between the 2 treatment groups despite occipital anchors using a compression-fit mechanism to provide fixation in less dense bone. These data suggest that an occipital anchor technique serves as a biomechanically viable clinical alternative to occipital plate fixation.

ABBREVIATIONS BMD = bone mineral density; ROM = range of motion.

Spine - 1 year subscription bundle (Individuals Only)

USD  $369.00

JNS + Pediatrics + Spine - 1 year subscription bundle (Individuals Only)

USD  $600.00

Contributor Notes

Correspondence Bryan W. Cunningham: Musculoskeletal Research Center, MedStar Union Memorial Hospital, Baltimore, MD. bcspine@gmail.com.

INCLUDE WHEN CITING Published online April 10, 2020; DOI: 10.3171/2020.1.SPINE191331.

Disclosures Research funding for the study was provided by Stryker Spine, Inc. Dr. Sandhu reports receiving royalties from Stryker Spine.

  • 1

    Lopez AJ, Scheer JK, Leibl KE, Anatomy and biomechanics of the craniovertebral junction. Neurosurg Focus. 2015;38(4):E2.

  • 2

    White AA III, Panjabi MM. The clinical biomechanics of the occipitoatlantoaxial complex. Orthop Clin North Am. 1978;9(4):867878.

  • 3

    Newman P, Sweetnam R. Occipito-cervical fusion. An operative technique and its indications. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1969;51(3):423431.

  • 4

    Perry J, Nickel VL. Total cervical-spine fusion for neck paralysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1959;41-A(1):3760.

  • 5

    Apostolides PJ, Dickman CA, Golfinos JG, Threaded Steinmann pin fusion of the craniovertebral junction. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1996;21(14):16301637.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6

    Cohen MW, Drummond DS, Flynn JM, A technique of occipitocervical arthrodesis in children using autologous rib grafts. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2001;26(7):825829.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7

    Abumi K, Takada T, Shono Y, Posterior occipitocervical reconstruction using cervical pedicle screws and plate-rod systems. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1999;24(14):14251434.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8

    Akbay A, Isikay I, Orunoglu M. Occipitocervical fixation using occipital bone hooks and cervical lateral mass screws: analysis of 16 cases. Turk Neurosurg. 2014;24(4):558564.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9

    Anderson PA, Oza AL, Puschak TJ, Sasso R. Biomechanics of occipitocervical fixation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2006;31(7):755761.

  • 10

    Haher TR, Bergman M, O’Brien M, The effect of the three columns of the spine on the instantaneous axis of rotation in flexion and extension. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1991;16(8)(suppl):S312–S318.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11

    Hurlbert RJ, Crawford NR, Choi WG, Dickman CA. A biomechanical evaluation of occipitocervical instrumentation: screw compared with wire fixation. J Neurosurg. 1999;90(1)(suppl):84–90.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12

    Oda I, Abumi K, Sell LC, Biomechanical evaluation of five different occipito-atlanto-axial fixation techniques. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1999;24(22):23772382.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13

    Oda I, Cunningham BW, Lee GA, Biomechanical properties of anterior thoracolumbar multisegmental fixation: an analysis of construct stiffness and screw-rod strain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000;25(18):23032311.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14

    Vender JR, Rekito AJ, Harrison SJ, McDonnell DE. The evolution of posterior cervical and occipitocervical fusion and instrumentation. Neurosurg Focus. 2004;16(1):E9.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15

    Felbaum D, Spitz S, Sandhu FA. Correction of clivoaxial angle deformity in the setting of suboccipital craniectomy: technical note. J Neurosurg Spine. 2015;23(1):815.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16

    Pait TG, Al-Mefty O, Boop FA, Inside-outside technique for posterior occipitocervical spine instrumentation and stabilization: preliminary results. J Neurosurg. 1999;90(1)(suppl):1–7.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17

    Sandhu FA, Pait TG, Benzel E, Henderson FC. Occipitocervical fusion for rheumatoid arthritis using the inside-outside stabilization technique. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003;28(4):414419.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18

    Panjabi MM. Biomechanical evaluation of spinal fixation devices: I. A conceptual framework. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1988;13(10):11291134.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19

    Zipnick RI, Merola AA, Gorup J, Occipital morphology. An anatomic guide to internal fixation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1996;21(15):17191724, 1729–1730.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20

    Ebraheim NA, Lu J, Biyani A, An anatomic study of the thickness of the occipital bone. Implications for occipitocervical instrumentation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1996;21(15):17251730.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 719 719 134
Full Text Views 73 73 11
PDF Downloads 60 60 12
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0