Skip to main content

TableĀ 2 Difference of intersegmental loads

From: Biomechanical comparison of static and dynamic cervical plates in terms of the bone fusion, tissue degeneration, and implant behavior

Ā 

ACDSP

DCP-R

ACDSP

DCP-R

C4-5

C5-6

Flexion

Intersegmental loads

ā†“48.0%

ā€‰+ā€‰3.2%

ā†“44.8%

ā€‰+ā€‰6.4%

ā†“45.7%

ā€‰+ā€‰3.6%

ā†“42.0%

ā€‰+ā€‰7.3%

Extension

Intersegmental loads

ā†“35.3%

ā€‰+ā€‰8.1%

ā†“30.1%

ā€‰+ā€‰13.3%

ā†“42.9%

ā€‰+ā€‰6.1%

ā†“38.1%

ā€‰+ā€‰10.9%

Bending

Intersegmental loads

ā†“45.5%

ā€‰+ā€‰4.2%

ā†“44.1%

ā€‰+ā€‰5.6%

ā†“47.3%

ā€‰+ā€‰3.4%

ā†“43.3%

ā€‰+ā€‰7.4%

Rotation

Intersegmental loads

ā†“40.5%

ā€‰+ā€‰3.5%

ā†“35.3%

ā€‰+ā€‰8.7%

ā†“44.9%

ā€‰+ā€‰3.1%

ā†“41.7%

ā€‰+ā€‰6.3%

  1. The comparison between SCP and two DCPsĀ using SCP as a benchmark showed that DCP-R shields the C4-5 and C5-6 intersegmental loads less than ACDSP. The stiffer SCP can remarkably shield the intersegmental loads