Skip to main content
. 2010 Jan 27;2(1):46–51. doi: 10.1111/j.1757-7861.2009.00064.x

Table 1.

Intervertebral ROM in L3‐L4 and L4‐L5 of intact and spondylolytic calf lumber spines with and without instrumentation under flexion‐extension, lateral flexion and rotation (Inline graphic, °)

Configuration Intact Defect M‐Scott S‐R‐H S‐R Buck
L3–L4 Flexion‐extension 10.48 ± 1.50 15.24 ± 2.53* 11.99 ± 1.60** 11.38 ± 1.55 11.47 ± 1.74 11.49 ± 1.39
Lateral flexion 15.67 ± 2.79 16.27 ± 2.92 15.92 ± 2.73 15.92 ± 2.86 16.07 ± 2.95 15.90 ± 2.77
Rotation 9.19 ± 1.04 15.70 ± 2.08* 9.48 ± 1.15 9.72 ± 0.95 9.76 ± 1.02 9.79 ± 1.23
L4–L5 Flexion‐extension 10.16 ± 1.71 13.43 ± 2.09* 10.98 ± 1.76** 10.33 ± 2.15 10.34 ± 1.95 10.35 ± 1.74
Lateral flexion 14.98 ± 1.53 15.67 ± 1.70 15.22 ± 1.56 15.22 ± 1.56 15.27 ± 1.55 15.30 ± 1.67
Rotation 8.36 ± 1.54 12.44 ± 3.20* 8.90 ± 1.37 8.44 ± 1.23 8.88 ± 1.26 8.97 ± 1.44
*

Significant difference between defect and the others (P < 0.05).

**

Significant difference between M‐Scott and the other three instruments (P < 0.05).

S‐R, screw‐rod; S‐R‐H, screw‐rod‐hook.