THE STABILIZING EFFECT OF POSTERIOR FIXATIONS IN A DESTABILIZED ATLANTOAXIAL COMPLEX MODEL IN CANINES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: This study was conducted to evaluate the kinematic responses and the restorative effectiveness of three posterior fixations in a canine atlantoaxial ( C 1-2 ) complex model. Methods: Nine canine ligamentous C 1-2 complexes were non-destructively tested in an intact condition, after ligamentous destabilization, and after bilateral stabilization with each of three posterior fixation methods: (1) Halifax inter-laminar clamps; (2) sub-laminar wiring; and (3) individual fixation of the C 1 lateral mass and the C 2 pedicle with screws and plates. Specimens were subjected to a relevantly applied loads through a loading frame rigidly attached to the C 1 . Two sets of three markers was separately attached to the mounting jigs of the C 1 and the C 2 to record the spatial locations after each loading step with a Vicron 370 system. The load-deformation data were analyzed. Results: Under a realistic loading paradigm, destabilized canine C 1-2 complex had 3-dimensional motion ranges highly consistent with the corresponding values observed in destabilized cadaveric human C 1-2 complex following a non-destructive loading paradigm. All the three posterior fixations significantly restricted the motion range of axial rotation loads (P<0.05). However, fixation either with posterior inter-articular screws and plates or inter-laminar clamps also effectively restricted the motion ranges of flexion/extension and lateral bending loads, whereas posterior wiring did not. Conclusion: We described a destabilized canine C 1-2 complex model. Under a realistic loading paradigm, the model had kinematic analogue of destabilized human C 1-2 complex. Our results indicated that posterior stabilization using inter-articular fixation techniques or inter-laminar clamps could effectively restrict hypermotility caused by C 1-2 ligamentous destabilization, and, therefore, appeared to be reliable fixation methods. In contrast, posterior wiring alone would preserve more residual motions, and, thus, might need other adjunctive fixations to offer an optimal condition for solid bony fusion.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".