An interventional study of Short Segment Versus Long Segment Transpedicular Screw Fixation in the Correction and Preservation of AO-Type B Thoracolumbar Fracture Alignment: A Comparative Study in Thoracolumbar Compression Fractures, sponsored by Assiut University. Not yet recruiting at 1 site in Egypt. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 65 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-08-20.
Sponsored by Assiut University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment
To compare the radiological, clinical and functional outcomes of short-segment versus long-segment transpediclular screw fixation in patients with thoracolumbar fractures AO-type B.
Thoracolumbar fractures represent the most common spinal injuries, predominantly occurring at the T11-L2 junction due to the biomechanical transition from the rigid thoracic to the mobile lumbar spine. This region accounts for approximately half of all traumatic spinal fractures, owing to changes in spinal curvature, facet joint orientation, and load-bearing mechanics (1).
Surgical management aims to restore spinal stability, correct kyphotic deformity, decompress neural elements, and enable early mobilization. Two posterior fixation strategies exist: short-segment fixation (SSF), spanning one level above and below the fracture with one or 2 intermediate screws in the fractured vertebra itself, and long-segment fixation (LSF), spanning two or more levels above and below with one or 2 intermediate screws in the fractured vertebra itself. Short-segment constructs preserve more motion segments with reduced surgical morbidity, while long-segment constructs provide potentially greater stability (2).
The optimal choice remains debated. A 2025 meta-analysis of 17 trials (1,031 patients) showed that LSF was associated with higher blood loss and longer operative time but better kyphosis correction maintenance and pain improvement (3). Short-segment fixation with intermediate screws at the fracture level has shown comparable results to LSF while preserving motion segments and reducing costs (4).
There is no randomized trial on AO-type B. Given these controversies, a prospective comparative study in our population is warranted.
50 studies on the registry are indexed under Fractures, Compression; 10 are open to participants now.
This study's planned enrollment of 60 is below the median of 73 across 32 interventional studies indexed under Fractures, Compression.
Browse Fractures, Compression studies →Assiut University is the lead sponsor of 5,078 studies on the registry; 2,178 are open to participants now.
Of its 14 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 0 (0%) have results posted.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
Exclusion Criteria:
Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Malignancy means cancer. Criteria about another or earlier malignancy ask whether you have had a different cancer, usually within a set number of years.
Some are commonly allowed, such as treated skin cancers other than melanoma and early cancers removed completely — check the exceptions this study lists.
Cancer (malignancy)
Malignancy means cancer. Criteria about another or earlier malignancy ask whether you have had a different cancer, usually within a set number of years.
Some are commonly allowed, such as treated skin cancers other than melanoma and early cancers removed completely — check the exceptions this study lists.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Short Segment Versus Long Segment Transpedicular Screw Fixation in the Correction and Preservation of AO-Type B Thoracolumbar Fracture Alignment: A Comparative Study
Procedure: Short Segment Versus Long Segment Transpedicular Screw Fixation in the Correction and Preservation of AO-Type B Thoracolumbar Fracture Alignment: A Comparative Study
Short Segment Versus Long Segment Transpedicular Screw Fixation in the Correction and Preservation of AO-Type B Thoracolumbar Fracture Alignment: A Comparative Study
Procedure: Short Segment Versus Long Segment Transpedicular Screw Fixation in the Correction and Preservation of AO-Type B Thoracolumbar Fracture Alignment: A Comparative Study
Thoracolumbar fractures represent the most common spinal injuries, predominantly occurring at the T11-L2 junction due to the biomechanical transition from the rigid thoracic to the mobile lumbar spine. This region accounts for approximately half of all traumatic spinal fractures, owing to changes in spinal curvature, facet joint orientation, and load-bearing mechanics (1). Surgical management aims to restore spinal stability, correct kyphotic deformity, decompress neural elements, and enable early mobilization. Two posterior fixation strategies exist: short-segment fixation (SSF), spanning one level above and below the fracture with one or 2 intermediate screws in the fractured vertebra itself, and long-segment fixation (LSF), spanning two or more levels above and below with one or 2 intermediate screws in the fractured vertebra itself. Short-segment constructs preserve more motion segments with reduced surgical morbidity, while long-segment constructs provide potentially greater stabi
• Maintenance of correction
• Maintenance of correction (change in cobb angle from immediate postoperative to final follow-up at 12 months)
Time frame: baseline
Operative kyphosis correction
Operative kyphosis correction (change in cobb angle from preoperative to immediate postoperative)
Time frame: Baseline
• Anterior vertebral body height ratio restoration
Time frame: from pre operative to last follow up at 12 months
VAS
VAS pain scores at all time points
Time frame: pre operative, post operative, at 3, 6 and 12 months follow-up
ODI
ODI functional outcome scores at all time points
Time frame: pre operative, post operative and at 3, 6 and 12 months follow up
Start is estimated for Sep 2026; primary completion for Sep 2028, 24 months later.
How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.
This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Aug 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.