Abstract:Study Design. Anatomical measurements and in vitro biomechanical testing were performed to evaluate a new method for posterior C1 fixation.Objective. This study sought to assess C1 posterior arch crossing screw fixation for posterior C1-C2 fixation, using anatomical measurements and biomechanical testing with traditional C1 pedicle screws (PS) in a cadaveric model.Summary of Background Data. Atlantoaxial instability often requires surgery, and the current methods for atlas fixation incur some risk to the vascular and neurological tissues. Thus, new, effective, and safe methods are needed for salvage operations.Methods. Morphometric analysis of the C1 posterior arch was performed using 3-dimensional computed tomography. Six fresh ligamentous human cervical spines (C0-C4) were evaluated for their biomechanics. The specimens were tested in their intact condition and after stabilization (C1-C2 PS, C1 posterior arch screws [PAS] with C2 PS) and injury due to 1.5 N.m of pure moment in flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation. During testing, 3-dimensional angular motion was measured with a motion capture platform (Vicon Nexus). Data for all scenarios were recorded, and statistical analysis was performed.Results. Anatomical assessment indicated that 91.51% of C1 posterior tubercles exceeded 7 mm in thickness, 93.40% had a width of the posterior arch of greater than 3.5 mm, and 65.57% had a unilateral screw length of greater than 15 mm, indicating that the posterior arch fixation could be achieved by two 3.5 x 15-mm screws placed in a crossed manner. Twenty-two cases (11%) were not suitable for crossing screw placement because the posterior arch was fl at and the entry point was present on the same side. Biomechanical testing showed that the PS and PAS rod-screw systems significantly reduced flexibility inflexion, extension, and rotation compared with the intact position. For lateral bending, there was a trend for the C1 PS and PAS systems toward decreased fl exibility in comparison with the intact position. At the same time, C1 PAS decreased C1-C2 movement by 33.0% in left bending (P = 0.171) and 24.4% in right bending (P = 0.095); however, no significant difference was observed for left bending with C1 PAS compared with C1 PS, and the C1 PS and PAS systems significantly reduced the fl exibility more than destabilization.Conclusion. Crossing screw fixation of the C1 posterior arch is straightforward and imposes little risk of injury to the neural and vascular structures as long as the implants remain intraosseous. According to the results of our anatomical and biomechanical study, C1 posterior arch crossing screw fixation may constitute an alternative method for posterior atlantoaxial fixation.

C2 nerve dysfunction associated with C1 lateral mass screw fixation.

Strategies of posterior screw fixation on C1 pedicle with the variation of posterior arch of altas

A Clinical Study of C2 Dome-Like Expansive Laminoplasty and C2 Expansive Open-Door Laminoplastyinupper Cervical Ossification of the Posterior Longitudinal Ligament

Progression of Research of Posterior Screw Fixation on Atlas

Biomechanical and Clinical Study of Anterior Transarticular Screw Fixation for Treatment of Traumatic Instability of C1-C2 Joint

C1 Lateral Mass Screw Insertion with Protection of C1-C2 Venous Sinus: Technical Note and Review of the Literature

Suboccipital neuralgia after C1 pedicle screw insertion: do we neglect atlantooccipital joint violation? - Case report and literature review

Clinically relevant complications related to posterior atlanto-axial fixation in atlanto-axial instability and their management

Treatment of Atlantoaxial Instability with C1-C2 Posterior Transarticular Screw Fixation

[C(2) Trans-Laminar Screws for Atlantoaxial Instability: Preliminary Clinical Report of Nine Cases].

A Prospective, Double-Blind, Randomized Controlled Trial of Treatment of Atlantoaxial Instability with C1 Posterior Arches >4 Mm by Comparing C1 Pedicle with Lateral Mass Screws Fixation

[Effect of C(1-2) Venous Sinus Upon Operative Safety of Atlantoaxial Screw Insertion].

Biomechanical Role of the C1 Lateral Mass Screws in Occipitoatlantoaxial Fixation: A Finite Element Analysis.

Outcome of Bilateral C1 Laminar Hooks Combined With C2 Pedicle Screw Fixation for the Treatment of C1-C2 Instability A Report of 18 Cases From a Single Chinese Center

Comparative Results Between C1 Pedicle Screw and C1 Lateral Mass Screw

Outcome of Bilateral C1 Laminar Hooks Combined with C2 Pedicle Screw Fixation for the Treatment of C1–C2 Instability

C5 Nerve Root Palsy after Posterior Cervical Spine Surgery

C1 Posterior Arch Crossing Screw Fixation for Atlantoaxial Joint Instability.

Surgical Treatment of Chronic C1-C2 Dislocation with Absence of Odontoid Process Using C1 Hooks with C2 Pedicle Screws A Case Report and Review of Literature

Radiographic evaluation of the technique for C1 lateral mass and C2 pedicle screw fixation in three hundred nineteen cases.

Biomechanical Comparison of C1 Lateral Mass—C2 Short Pedicle Screw—C3 Lateral Mass Screw-Rod Construct Versus Goel-Harms Fixation for Atlantoaxial Instability