Abstract：Objective To establish L4 vertebrae burst fractures and take a biomechanical test of different internal fixations so as to discuss the significance of internal fixation using short-segment plus Index-level screws in treatment of low lumbar burst fractures. Methods Ten fresh human lumbosacral vertebrae specimens were used to establish models of L4 vertebrae burst fractures by corpectomy and partial removal of ligament. Thereafter, the biomechanical test was performed in order as below: long-segment fixation, short-segment fixation and short-segment construction plus Index-level screw fixation. Differences of range of motion (ROM）of the lumbar after three different internal fixations were compared. Results Compared with short-segment fixation, short-segment plus Index-level screw fixation showed that ROM of the lumbar was decreased in front flexion, axial rotation and lateral bending ( P<0.05), but stability was improved and ROM of lumbar was decreased by 32.7% in back extension ( P>0.05). Conclusions Compared with short-segment fixation, the short-segment plus Index-level screw fixation can increase initial lumbar stability by average 32.5% in treatment of low lumbar burst fractures. In the meantime, short-segment plus Index-level screw fixation provides larger ROM of the lumbar than the long-segment fixation.
WANG Tao,MA Jian-xiong,WANG Yu-long et al. Biomechanical analysis of short-segment plus Index-level screw fixation for low lumbar burst fractures[J]. CHINESE JOURNAL OF TRAUMA, 2013, 29(5): 465-469.
［1］Seybold EA, Sweeney CA, Fredrickson BE, et al. Functional outcome of low lumbar burst fractures. A multicenter review of operative and nonoperative treatment of L3-L5. Spine, 1999, 24(20):2154-2161.
［2］Lehman RA Jr, Paik H, Eckel TT, et al. Low lumbar burst fractures: a unique fracture mechanism sustained in our current overseas conflicts. Spine, 2012, 12(9):784-790.
［4］Benson DR, Burkus JK, Montesano PX, et al. Unstable thoracolumbar and lumbar burst fractures treated with the AO fixateur interne. J Spinal Disord, 1992, 5（3）:335-343.
［5］Kramer DL, Rodgers WB, Mansfield FL. Transpedicular instrumentation and short-segment fusion of thoracolumbar fractures: a prospective study using a single instrumentation system. J Orthop Trauma, 1995, 9（6）:499-506.
［6］McLain RF, Sparling E, Benson DR. Early failure of short-segment pedicle instrumentation for thoracolumbar fractures. A preliminary report. J Bone Joint Surg (Am), 1993, 75(2):162-167.
［7］Mahar A, Kim C, Wedemeyer M, et al. Short-segment fixation of lumbar burst fractures using pedicle fixation at the level of the fracture. Spine， 2007, 32(14):1503-1507.
［8］Baaj AA, Reyes PM, Yaqoobi AS, et al. Biomechanical advantage of the index-level pedicle screw in unstable thoracolumbar junction fractures. J Neurosurg Spine, 2011, 14(2):192-197.
［11］McCormack T, Karaikovic E, Gaines RW. The loading-sharing classification of spine fractures. Spine, 1994, 19(15):1741-1744.
［12］Parker JW, Lane JR, Karaikovic EE, et al. Successful short-segment instrumentation and fusion for thoracolumbar spine fractures: a consecutive 4 1/2-year series. Spine, 2000, 25(9):1157-1170.
［13］McLain RF, Burkus JK, Benson DR. Segmental instrumentation for thoracic and thoracolumbar fractures: prospective analysis of construct survival and five-year follow-up. Spine, 2001,1(5):310-323.
［15］Ko SB, Lee SW, Baek SH, et al. Result of Posterior Instrumentation Without Fusion in the Management of Thoracolumbar and Lumbar Unstable Burst Fracture. J Spinal Disord Tech, 2012 May 10. ［Epub ahead of print］
［16］Yang HL, Shi JH, Ebraheim M, et al. Outcome of thoracolumbar burst fractures treated with indirect reduction and fixation without fusion. Eur Spine J, 2011, 20(3):380-386.
