BACKGROUND: In recent years, the zero-profile implant (Zero-p) has emerged as a promising internal fixation technique. Although studies have indicated its potential superiority over conventional cage-plate implant (Cage-plate) in the treatment of degenerative cervical spondylosis, there remains a lack of definitive comparative reports regarding its indications, safety, and efficacy.
METHODS: A computerized search was conducted on English and Chinese databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, CNKI, Wanfang and VIP. Additionally, a manual search was meticulously carried out on Chinese medical journals, spanning from the inception of the respective databases until August 2023. The meta-analysis utilized a case-control study approach and was executed through the utilization of RevMan 5.3 software. Stringent quality evaluation and data extraction procedures were implemented to guarantee the reliability and validity of the findings.
RESULTS: Nine high-quality studies with 808 patients were included. Meta-analysis showed that the operation time (MD = - 13.28; 95% CI (- 17.53, - 9.04), P < 0.00001), intraoperative blood loss (MD = - 6.61; 95% CI (- 10.47, - 2.75), P = 0.0008), incidence of postoperative dysphagia at various time points: within the first month after surgery (OR = 0.36; 95% CI (0.22, 0.58), P < 0.0001), 1-3 months after surgery (OR = 0.20; 95% CI (0.08, 0.49), P = 0.0004), the final follow-up (OR = 0.21; 95% CI (0.05, 0.83), P = 0.003) and the rate of postoperative adjacent disc degeneration (OR = 0.46; 95% CI (0.25, 0.84), P = 0.01) were significantly lower in the Zero-p group than in the Cage-plate group. Additionally, was also significantly lower in the Zero-p group. However, there were no significant differences in the JOA score, the final follow-up NDI score, surgical segmental fusion rate, postoperative height of adjacent vertebrae, or postoperative subsidence rate between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS: In summary, when treating single-segment degenerative cervical spondylosis, both internal fixation techniques are reliable and effective. However, Zero-P  implant offer several advantages over cage-plate implant, including shorter operation duration, less intraoperative blood loss, reduced postoperative dysphagia, and slower adjacent disc degeneration. Additionally, Zero-P implant has a broader application space, making them a preferred choice in certain cases.

BACKGROUND: To elucidate the differences in mechanical performance between a novel axially controlled compression spinal rod (ACCSR) for lumbar spondylolysis (LS) and the common spinal rod (CSR).
METHODS: A total of 36 ACCSRs and 36 CSRs from the same batch were used in this study, each with a diameter of 6.0 mm. Biomechanical tests were carried out on spinal rods for the ACCSR group and on pedicle screw-rod internal fixation systems for the CSR group. The spinal rod tests were conducted following the guidelines outlined in the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) F 2193, while the pedicle screw-rod internal fixation system tests adhered to ASTM F 1798-97 standards.
RESULTS: The stiffness of ACCSR and CSR was 1559.15 ± 50.15 and 3788.86 ± 156.45 N/mm (P < .001). ACCSR\'s yield load was 1345.73 (1297.90-1359.97) N, whereas CSR\'s was 4046.83 (3805.8-4072.53) N (P = .002). ACCSR\'s load in the 2.5 millionth cycle of the fatigue four-point bending test was 320 N. The axial gripping capacity of ACCSR and CSR was 1632.53 ± 165.64 and 1273.62 ± 205.63 N (P = .004). ACCSR\'s torsional gripping capacity was 3.45 (3.23-3.47) Nm, while CSR\'s was 3.27 (3.07-3.59) Nm (P = .654). The stiffness of the pedicle screws of the ACCSR and CSR group was 783.83 (775.67-798.94) and 773.14 (758.70-783.62) N/mm (P = .085). The yield loads on the pedicle screws of the ACCSR and CSR group was 1345.73 (1297.90-1359.97) and 4046.83 (3805.8-4072.53) N (P = .099).
CONCLUSIONS: Although ACCSR exhibited lower yield load, stiffness, and fatigue resistance compared to CSR, it demonstrated significantly higher axial gripping capacity and met the stress requirement of the human isthmus. Consequently, ACCSR presents a promising alternative to CSR for LS remediation.

METHODS: We constructed finite element (FE) models of the cervical spine consisting of C2-C7 and predicted the biomechanical effects of different surgical procedures and instruments on adjacent segments, internal fixation systems, and the overall cervical spine through FE analysis.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the biomechanical effects between the zero-profile device and cage-plate device in skip-level multistage anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF).
BACKGROUND: ACDF is often considered the standard treatment for degenerative cervical spondylosis. However, the selection of surgical methods and instruments in cases of skip-level cervical degenerative disk disease is still controversial.
METHODS: Three FE models were constructed, which used noncontiguous 2-level Zero-P (NCZP) devices for C3/4 and C5/6, a noncontiguous 2-level cage-plate (NCCP) for C3/4 and C5/6, and a contiguous 3-level cage-plate (CCP) for C3/6. Simulate daily activities in ABAQUS. The range of motion (ROM), von Mises stress distribution of the endplate and internal fixation system, and intervertebral disk pressure (IDP) of each model were recorded and compared.
RESULTS: Similar to the stress of the cortical bone, the maximum stress of the Zero-P device was higher than that of the CP device for most activities. The ROM increments of the superior, inferior, and intermediate segments of the NCZP model were lower than those of the NCCP and CCP models in many actions. In terms of the IDP, the increment value of stress for the NCZP model was the smallest, whereas those of the NCCP and CCP models were larger. Similarly, the increment value of stress on the endplate also shows the minimum in the NCZP model.
CONCLUSIONS: Noncontiguous ACDF with zero profile can reduce the stress on adjacent intervertebral disks and endplates, resulting in a reduced risk of adjacent segment disease development. However, the high cortical bone stress caused by the Zero-P device may influence the risk of fractures.

OBJECTIVE: Expandable transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) cages were designed to address the limitations of static cages. Bilateral cage insertion can potentially enhance stability, fusion rates, and segmental lordosis. However, the benefits of unilateral versus bilateral expandable cages with varying sizes in TLIF remain unclear. This study used a validated finite element spine model to compare the biomechanical properties of L5-S1 TLIF by using differently sized expandable cages inserted unilaterally or bilaterally.
METHODS: A finite element model of X-PAC expandable lumbar cages was created and used at the L5-S1 level. This model had cage dimensions of 9 mm in height, 15° in lordosis, and varying widths and lengths. Various placements (unilateral vs bilateral) and sizes were examined under pure moment loading to evaluate range of motion, adjacent-segment motion, and endplate stress.
RESULTS: Stability at the L5-S1 level decreased when smaller cages were used in both the unilateral and bilateral cage models. In the unilateral model, cage 1 (the smallest cage) resulted in 47.9% more motion at the L5-S1 level compared to cage 5 (the largest cage) in flexion, as well as 64.8% more motion in extension. Similarly, in the bilateral TLIF model, bilateral cage 1 led to 49.4% more motion at the L5-S1 level in flexion and 73.4% more motion in extension compared to bilateral cage 5. Unilateral insertion of cage 5 provided superior stability in flexion and surpassed cages 1-3 in extension when compared to cages inserted either unilaterally or bilaterally. Reduced motion at L5-S1 correlated with increased adjacent-segment motion at L4-5. Bilateral TLIF resulted in greater adjacent-segment motion compared to unilateral TLIF with the same-size cages. Inferior endplates experienced higher stress during flexion and extension than superior endplates, with this difference being more pronounced in the bilateral model. In bilateral cage placement, stress differences ranged from 46.3% to 60.0%, while they ranged from 1.1% to 9.6% in unilateral cages. Qualitative analysis revealed increased focal stress in unilateral cages versus bilateral cages.
CONCLUSIONS: The authors\' study shows that using a large unilateral TLIF cage may offer better stability than the bilateral insertion of smaller cages. While large bilateral cages increase adjacent-segment motion, they also provide a uniform stress distribution on the endplates. These findings deepen our understanding of the biomechanics of the available expandable TLIF cages.

UNASSIGNED: To summarize the research progress in the treatment of distal humeral metaphyseal-diaphyseal junction (DHMDJ) fractures in children and to provide reference for clinical practice.
UNASSIGNED: The characteristics and treatment methods of transverse and comminuted DHMDJ fractures in children were summarized and analyzed by referring to relevant literature at home and abroad.
UNASSIGNED: DHMDJ fractures in children are not uncommon clinically, with high fracture line position, multi-directional instability, difficult closed reduction in treatment, and easy to cause complications such as coronal and sagittal deformity of the elbow. The Kirschner wire technique was effective for DHMDJ fractures with the fracture line at the middle and low levels, but was prone to iatrogenic ulnar nerve injury. Elastic stable intramedullary nail is suitable for higher-position transverse DHMDJ fractures. However, this technique requires a second operation to remove the internal fixator, and may cause iatrogenic epiphysis plate injury in children. External fixator is a new way to treat DHMDJ fractures, and it can show satisfactory results for transverse and comminuted DHMDJ fractures. However, at present, there are few relevant studies, and most of them focus on biomechanical studies, and the efficacy lacks high-quality clinical research support.
UNASSIGNED: The ultimate goal of DHMDJ fracture treatment in children is to restore the anatomical alignment of the fracture and prevent the loss of reduction. The choice of internal fixator depends on the location of the fracture line and the shape of the fracture to provide personalized treatment.
UNASSIGNED: 总结儿童肱骨远端骨干-干骺端交界区（distal humeral metaphyseal-diaphyseal junction，DHMDJ）骨折治疗研究进展，为临床提供参考。.
UNASSIGNED: 广泛查阅国内外有关文献，对儿童DHMDJ横形骨折及内侧柱不稳定骨折特点及相关治疗方法进行总结分析。.
UNASSIGNED: 儿童DHMDJ骨折在临床并不少见，其骨折线位置较高，往往具有多方向不稳定性，治疗上闭合复位困难，容易引起肘关节冠状面和矢状面畸形等并发症。以往克氏针技术对于中、低位骨折疗效较好，但容易引起医源性尺神经损伤。弹性髓内钉适用于骨折线位置较高的横形骨折，然而需要二次手术取出内固定物，还可能导致医源性骺板损伤。外固定架是治疗DHMDJ骨折新方式，无论是横形骨折，还是内侧柱不稳定骨折，临床疗效均满意。然而，目前相关研究较少，多集中于生物力学研究，疗效缺少高质量临床研究支持。.
UNASSIGNED: 儿童DHMDJ骨折治疗以恢复骨折解剖对位和防止复位丢失为最终目的，内固定物选择取决于骨折线位置和骨折形态。.

OBJECTIVE: Early-onset scoliosis (EOS) has always been a challenging situation for spine surgeons. The aim of treatment is to control the direction of curve progression to allow for the complete development of lungs. Among all the growth constructs available, traditional growth rods (TGR) and magnetically controlled growth rods (MCGR) are most widely used. The MCGR has been introduced a few years back and there is a dearth of long-term follow-up studies. The purpose of this study is to compare the effectiveness of TGR and MCGR for the treatment of EOS.
METHODS: All patients of EOS managed with either TGR or MCGR were included in the study. The patients managed with other methods or having follow-up < 2-years were excluded from the study. A total of 20 patients were recruited in the MCGR group and 28 patients were recruited in the TGR group. Both groups were matched by etiology, gender, pre-operative radiological parameters, and complications including unplanned surgeries.
RESULTS: The mean age in our study was 7.90 years in the MCGR group and 7.46 years in the TGR group. The mean duration of follow-up in the MCGR group was 50.89 months and in the TGR group 94.2 months. Pre-operative cobb\'s angle in the coronal plane and T1-S1 were comparable in both groups with a mean cobb\'s angle of 65.4 in MCGR and 70.5 in TGR. The mean T1-S1 length in the MCGR group was 36.1cms and in the TGR group was 35.2 cms (p = 0.18). The average increase in T1-S1 length was 1.3 cm/year in the TGR group and 1.1 cm/year in the MCGR group (p > 0.05). The TGR patients underwent 186 open lengthening surgeries and 11 unplanned surgeries for various complications. The MCGR group has 180 non-invasive lengthening with only 4 unplanned returns to OT for various causes.
CONCLUSIONS: The curve correction was similar in both TGR and MCGR groups. The average T1-S1 length achieved on final follow-up was similar in both groups. The MCGR patients have attained similar correction with fewer invasive procedures and lesser complications compared to the TGR group.

The Waveflex semi-rigid-dynamic-internal-fixation system shows good short-term effects in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases, but there are few long-term follow-up studies, especially for recovery of sagittal balance. Fifty patients with lumbar degenerative diseases treated from January 2016 to October 2017 were retrospectively analysed: 25 patients treated with Waveflex semi-rigid-dynamic-internal-fixation system (Waveflex group) and 25 patients treated with double-segment PLIF (PLIF group). Clinical efficacy was evaluated by Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Imaging data before surgery and at 3 months, 1 year, and 5 years postoperatively was used for imaging indicator assessment. Local disc degeneration of the cephalic adjacent segment (including disc height index (DHI), intervertebral foramen height (IFH), and range of motion (ROM)) and overall spinal motor function (including lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic incidence (PI), sacral slope (SS), pelvic tilt (PT), and |PI-LL|) were analysed. Regarding clinical efficacy, comparison of VAS and ODI scores between the Waveflex and PLIF groups showed no significant preoperative or postoperative differences. The comparison of the objective imaging indicators showed no significant differences in the DHI, IFH, LL, |PI-LL|, and SS values between the Waveflex and PLIF groups preoperatively and 3 months postoperatively (P > 0.05). These values were significantly different at 1 and 5 years postoperatively (P < 0.05), and the Waveflex group showed better ROM values than those of the PLIF group (P < 0.05). PI values were not significantly different between the groups, but PT showed a significant improvement in the Waveflex group 5 years postoperatively (P < 0.05). The Waveflex semi-rigid dynamic fixation system can effectively reduce the probability of intervertebral disc degeneration in upper adjacent segments. Simultaneously, patients in the Waveflex group showed postoperative improvements in LL, spinal sagittal imbalance, and quality of life.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of the study was to assess and compare the clinical efficacy of bone transport with either circular or unilateral external fixators over an intramedullary nail in the treatment of tibial bone defects caused by infection.
METHODS: Between May 2010 and January 2019, clinical and radiographic data were collected and analyzed for patients with bone defects caused by infection. Thirteen patients underwent bone transport using a unilateral external fixator over an intramedullary nail (Group A), while 12 patients were treated with a circular external fixator over an intramedullary nail (Group B). The bone and functional outcomes of both groups were assessed and compared using the Association for the Study and Application of the Method of the Ilizarov criteria, and postoperative complications were evaluated according to the Paley classification.
RESULTS: A total of 25 patients were successfully treated with bone transport using external fixators over an intramedullary nail, with a mean follow-up time of 31.63 ± 5.88 months. There were no significant statistical differences in age, gender, previous surgery per patient, duration of infection, defect size, and follow-up time between Group A and Group B (P > 0.05). However, statistically significant differences were observed in operation time (187.13 ± 21.88 min vs. 255.76 ± 36.42 min, P = 0.002), intraoperative blood loss (39.26 ± 7.33 mL vs. 53.74 ± 10.69 mL, P < 0.001), external fixation time (2.02 ± 0.31 month vs. 2.57 ± 0.38 month, P = 0.045), external fixation index (0.27 ± 0.08 month/cm vs. 0.44 ± 0.09 month/cm, P = 0.042), and bone union time (8.37 ± 2.30 month vs. 9.07 ± 3.12, P = 0.032) between Group A and Group B. The excellent and good rate of bone and functional results were higher in Group A compared to Group B (76.9% vs. 75% and 84.6% vs. 58.3%). Statistically significant differences were observed in functional results (excellent/good/fair/poor, 5/6/2/0 vs. 2/5/4/1, P = 0.013) and complication per patient (0.38 vs. 1.16, P = 0.012) between Group A and Group B.
CONCLUSIONS: Bone transport using a combined technique of external fixators over an intramedullary nail proved to be an effective method in treating tibial bone defects caused by infection. In comparison to circular external fixators, bone transport utilizing a unilateral external fixator over an intramedullary nail resulted in less external fixation time, fewer complications, and better functional outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Single limb support phase of the gait-cycle in patients who are treated for a pertrochanteric fracture is characterized by transversal loads acting on the lag screw, tending to block its dynamization. If the simultaneous axial force overcomes transversal loads of the sliding screw, the dynamization can still occur.
METHODS: Biomechanical investigation was performed for three types of dynamic implants: Gamma Nail, and two types of Selfdynamizable Internal Fixators (SIF) - SIF-7 (containing two 7 mm non-cannulated sliding screws), and SIF-10 (containing one 10 mm cannulated sliding screw). Contact surface between the stem and the sliding screws is larger in SIF implants than in Gamma Nail, as the stem of Gamma Nail is hollow. A special testing device was designed for this study to provide simultaneous application of a controlled sliding screws bending moment and a controlled transversal load on sliding screws (Qt) without using of weights. Using each of the implants, axial forces required to initiate sliding screws dynamization (Qa) were applied and measured using a tensile testing machine, for several values of sliding screws bending moment. Standard least-squares method was used to present the results through the linear regression model.
RESULTS: Positive correlation between Qt and Qa was confirmed (p < 0.05). While performing higher bending moments in all the tested implants, Qa was higher than it could be provided by the body weight. It was the highest in Gamma Nail, and the lowest in SIF-10.
CONCLUSIONS: A larger contact surface between a sliding screw and stem results in lower forces required to initiate dynamization of a sliding screw. Patients treated for a pertrochanteric fracture by a sliding screw internal fixation who have longer femoral neck or higher body weight could have different programme of early postoperative rehabilitation than lighter patients or patients with shorter femoral neck.

In 1994, the use of interfacet spacer placement was for joint distraction, reduction, and fusion to supplement atlantoaxial or occipitocervical fixation. Here, we present a unique case of bilateral atlantoaxial interfacet fixation using cervical facet cages (CFC) in a pediatric patient with basilar invagination. In addition, we review the literature on atlantoaxial facet fixation. We present a 12-year-old boy with Wiedemann-Steiner syndrome who presented with multiple episodes of sudden neck jerking, described as in response to a sensation of being shocked, and guarding against neck motion, found to have basilar invagination with cervicomedullary compression. He underwent an occiput to C3 fusion with C1-C2 CFC fixation. We also conducted a literature review identifying all publications using the following keywords: \"C1\" AND \"C2\" OR \"atlantoaxial\" AND \"facet spacer\" OR \"DTRAX.\" The patient demonstrated postoperative radiographic reduction of his basilar invagination from 6.4 to 4.1 mm of superior displacement above the McRae line. There was a 4.5 mm decrease in the atlantodental interval secondary to decreased dens retroflexion. His postoperative course was complicated by worsening of his existing dysphagia but was otherwise unremarkable. His neck symptoms completely resolved. We illustrate the safe use of CFC for atlantoaxial facet distraction, reduction, and instrumented fixation in a pediatric patient with basilar invagination. Review of the literature demonstrates that numerous materials can be safely placed as a C1-C2 interfacet spacer including bone grafts, titanium spacers, and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion cages. We argue that CFC may be included in this arsenal even in pediatric patients.