Topping-Off a Long Thoracic Stabilization With Semi-Rigid Constructs May Have Favorable Biomechanical Effects to Prevent Proximal Junctional Kyphosis: A Biomechanical Comparison
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Study DesignIn-vitro cadaveric biomechanical study.ObjectivesLong posterior spinal fusion is a standard treatment for adult spinal deformity. However, these rigid constructs are known to alter motion and stress to the adjacent non-instrumented vertebrae, increasing the risk of proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK). This study aimed to biomechanically compare a standard rigid construct vs constructs "topped off" with a semi-rigid construct. By understanding semi-rigid constructs' effect on motion and overall construct stiffness, surgeons and researchers could better optimize fusion constructs to potentially decrease the risk of PJK and the need for revision surgery.MethodsNine human cadaveric spines (T1-T12) underwent non-destructive biomechanical range of motion tests in pure bending or torsion and were instrumented with an all-pedicle-screw (APS) construct from T6-T9. The specimens were sequentially instrumented with semi-rigid constructs at T5: (i) APS plus sublaminar bands; (ii) APS plus supralaminar hooks; (iii) APS plus transverse process hooks; and (iv) APS plus short pedicle screws.ResultsAPS plus transverse process hooks had a range of motion (ie, relative angle) for T4-T5 and T5-T6, as well as an overall mechanical stiffness for T1-T12, that was more favourable, as it reduced motion at adjacent levels without a stark increase in stiffness. Moreover, APS plus transverse process hooks had the most linear change for range of motion across the entire T3-T7 range.ConclusionsPresent findings suggest that APS plus transverse process hooks has a favourable biomechanical effect that may reduce PJK for long spinal fusions compared to the other constructs examined.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".