2017
DOI: 10.1007/s00264-017-3423-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Safe placement of lateral mass screw in the subaxial cervical spine: a case series

Abstract: All screws were inserted into the lateral mass of C3-C6 cervical vertebrae following the current technique. Post-operative CT scans confirmed all screws inserted into the safe zone and relative safe zone of the lateral mass without any screw placed into the transverse foramen. The angle between the lateral mass screw and the vertical line was 40.49 ± 5.44 degrees on the axial CT images. Twenty-four patients were followed up for an average of 25.79 months (range, 20-30 months), and 22 cases evaluated as no or m… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 27 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Inserting screws into the lateral mass is relatively easier and safer than insertion into the cervical pedicle, hence, increasing popularity of LMS fixation. 1 - 4 However, the biomechanical advantage of CPS cannot be overlooked when correction of cervical deformity, or other rigid multiple segmental reconstructions, are required. 5 The pedicle of the subaxial cervical spine presents a smaller diameter and a larger convergence angle than those of the thoracic or lumbar vertebrae, suggesting that CPS insertion poses a risk to the neighboring neurovascular structures.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Inserting screws into the lateral mass is relatively easier and safer than insertion into the cervical pedicle, hence, increasing popularity of LMS fixation. 1 - 4 However, the biomechanical advantage of CPS cannot be overlooked when correction of cervical deformity, or other rigid multiple segmental reconstructions, are required. 5 The pedicle of the subaxial cervical spine presents a smaller diameter and a larger convergence angle than those of the thoracic or lumbar vertebrae, suggesting that CPS insertion poses a risk to the neighboring neurovascular structures.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%