Cargando…
Effects of occipital-atlas stabilization in the upper cervical spine kinematics: an in vitro study
This study compares upper cervical spine range of motion (ROM) in the three cardinal planes before and after occiput-atlas (C0–C1) stabilization. After the dissection of the superficial structures to the alar ligament and the fixation of C2, ten cryopreserved upper cervical columns were manually mob...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8149863/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34035331 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-90052-6 |
_version_ | 1783698038069395456 |
---|---|
author | Hidalgo-García, César Lorente, Ana I. López-de-Celis, Carlos Lucha-López, Orosia Malo-Urriés, Miguel Rodríguez-Sanz, Jacobo Maza-Frechín, Mario Tricás-Moreno, José Miguel Krauss, John Pérez-Bellmunt, Albert |
author_facet | Hidalgo-García, César Lorente, Ana I. López-de-Celis, Carlos Lucha-López, Orosia Malo-Urriés, Miguel Rodríguez-Sanz, Jacobo Maza-Frechín, Mario Tricás-Moreno, José Miguel Krauss, John Pérez-Bellmunt, Albert |
author_sort | Hidalgo-García, César |
collection | PubMed |
description | This study compares upper cervical spine range of motion (ROM) in the three cardinal planes before and after occiput-atlas (C0–C1) stabilization. After the dissection of the superficial structures to the alar ligament and the fixation of C2, ten cryopreserved upper cervical columns were manually mobilized in the three cardinal planes of movement without and with a screw stabilization of C0–C1. Upper cervical ROM and mobilization force were measured using the Vicon motion capture system and a load cell respectively. The ROM without C0–C1 stabilization was 19.8° ± 5.2° in flexion and 14.3° ± 7.7° in extension. With stabilization, the ROM was 11.5° ± 4.3° and 6.6° ± 3.5°, respectively. The ROM without C0–C1 stabilization was 4.7° ± 2.3° in right lateral flexion and 5.6° ± 3.2° in left lateral flexion. With stabilization, the ROM was 2.3° ± 1.4° and 2.3° ± 1.2°, respectively. The ROM without C0–C1 stabilization was 33.9° ± 6.7° in right rotation and 28.0° ± 6.9° in left rotation. With stabilization, the ROM was 28.5° ± 7.0° and 23.7° ± 8.5° respectively. Stabilization of C0–C1 reduced the upper cervical ROM by 46.9% in the sagittal plane, 55.3% in the frontal plane, and 15.6% in the transverse plane. Also, the resistance to movement during upper cervical mobilization increased following C0–C1 stabilization. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8149863 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-81498632021-05-26 Effects of occipital-atlas stabilization in the upper cervical spine kinematics: an in vitro study Hidalgo-García, César Lorente, Ana I. López-de-Celis, Carlos Lucha-López, Orosia Malo-Urriés, Miguel Rodríguez-Sanz, Jacobo Maza-Frechín, Mario Tricás-Moreno, José Miguel Krauss, John Pérez-Bellmunt, Albert Sci Rep Article This study compares upper cervical spine range of motion (ROM) in the three cardinal planes before and after occiput-atlas (C0–C1) stabilization. After the dissection of the superficial structures to the alar ligament and the fixation of C2, ten cryopreserved upper cervical columns were manually mobilized in the three cardinal planes of movement without and with a screw stabilization of C0–C1. Upper cervical ROM and mobilization force were measured using the Vicon motion capture system and a load cell respectively. The ROM without C0–C1 stabilization was 19.8° ± 5.2° in flexion and 14.3° ± 7.7° in extension. With stabilization, the ROM was 11.5° ± 4.3° and 6.6° ± 3.5°, respectively. The ROM without C0–C1 stabilization was 4.7° ± 2.3° in right lateral flexion and 5.6° ± 3.2° in left lateral flexion. With stabilization, the ROM was 2.3° ± 1.4° and 2.3° ± 1.2°, respectively. The ROM without C0–C1 stabilization was 33.9° ± 6.7° in right rotation and 28.0° ± 6.9° in left rotation. With stabilization, the ROM was 28.5° ± 7.0° and 23.7° ± 8.5° respectively. Stabilization of C0–C1 reduced the upper cervical ROM by 46.9% in the sagittal plane, 55.3% in the frontal plane, and 15.6% in the transverse plane. Also, the resistance to movement during upper cervical mobilization increased following C0–C1 stabilization. Nature Publishing Group UK 2021-05-25 /pmc/articles/PMC8149863/ /pubmed/34035331 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-90052-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Article Hidalgo-García, César Lorente, Ana I. López-de-Celis, Carlos Lucha-López, Orosia Malo-Urriés, Miguel Rodríguez-Sanz, Jacobo Maza-Frechín, Mario Tricás-Moreno, José Miguel Krauss, John Pérez-Bellmunt, Albert Effects of occipital-atlas stabilization in the upper cervical spine kinematics: an in vitro study |
title | Effects of occipital-atlas stabilization in the upper cervical spine kinematics: an in vitro study |
title_full | Effects of occipital-atlas stabilization in the upper cervical spine kinematics: an in vitro study |
title_fullStr | Effects of occipital-atlas stabilization in the upper cervical spine kinematics: an in vitro study |
title_full_unstemmed | Effects of occipital-atlas stabilization in the upper cervical spine kinematics: an in vitro study |
title_short | Effects of occipital-atlas stabilization in the upper cervical spine kinematics: an in vitro study |
title_sort | effects of occipital-atlas stabilization in the upper cervical spine kinematics: an in vitro study |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8149863/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34035331 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-90052-6 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hidalgogarciacesar effectsofoccipitalatlasstabilizationintheuppercervicalspinekinematicsaninvitrostudy AT lorenteanai effectsofoccipitalatlasstabilizationintheuppercervicalspinekinematicsaninvitrostudy AT lopezdeceliscarlos effectsofoccipitalatlasstabilizationintheuppercervicalspinekinematicsaninvitrostudy AT luchalopezorosia effectsofoccipitalatlasstabilizationintheuppercervicalspinekinematicsaninvitrostudy AT malourriesmiguel effectsofoccipitalatlasstabilizationintheuppercervicalspinekinematicsaninvitrostudy AT rodriguezsanzjacobo effectsofoccipitalatlasstabilizationintheuppercervicalspinekinematicsaninvitrostudy AT mazafrechinmario effectsofoccipitalatlasstabilizationintheuppercervicalspinekinematicsaninvitrostudy AT tricasmorenojosemiguel effectsofoccipitalatlasstabilizationintheuppercervicalspinekinematicsaninvitrostudy AT kraussjohn effectsofoccipitalatlasstabilizationintheuppercervicalspinekinematicsaninvitrostudy AT perezbellmuntalbert effectsofoccipitalatlasstabilizationintheuppercervicalspinekinematicsaninvitrostudy |