Becker et al: Influence of two consecutive partial lateral corpectomies on passive motion of the canine lumbar spine
Veterinary Surgery 1, 2026

🔍 Key Findings

Each PLC significantly increased passive range of motion (ROM) in the sagittal and dorsal planes (p < .05).
No significant change was observed in rotational ROM after either PLC.
First PLC increased sagittal ROM by 2.4° (23% increase); second PLC added 1.0° (8% increase).
Dorsal ROM increased by 2.3° after first PLC and 1.5° after second PLC.
Second PLC did not cause greater destabilization than the first — both contributed similarly to ROM increase.
Failure testing showed that spinal segments with two PLCs failed at 13 Nm, while native spines withstood up to 25 Nm, suggesting reduced load-bearing capacity but not clinically significant under normal conditions.
Rotational stability was preserved, possibly due to intact facet joints and lamina, which play a larger role in rotation.
Study supports the clinical feasibility of two consecutive PLCs, but cautions against excessive bone removal due to potential for spinal instability.

Simini Surgery Review Podcast

Thanks for the feedback!
‍We'll keep fine-tuning the articles vault.

Oops — didn’t go through.
‍Mind trying that again?

Flag for review Suggest findings

← Articles

Becker et al: Influence of two consecutive partial lateral corpectomies on passive motion of the canine lumbar spine
Veterinary Surgery 1, 2026

🔍 Key Findings

Each PLC significantly increased passive range of motion (ROM) in the sagittal and dorsal planes (p < .05).
No significant change was observed in rotational ROM after either PLC.
First PLC increased sagittal ROM by 2.4° (23% increase); second PLC added 1.0° (8% increase).
Dorsal ROM increased by 2.3° after first PLC and 1.5° after second PLC.
Second PLC did not cause greater destabilization than the first — both contributed similarly to ROM increase.
Failure testing showed that spinal segments with two PLCs failed at 13 Nm, while native spines withstood up to 25 Nm, suggesting reduced load-bearing capacity but not clinically significant under normal conditions.
Rotational stability was preserved, possibly due to intact facet joints and lamina, which play a larger role in rotation.
Study supports the clinical feasibility of two consecutive PLCs, but cautions against excessive bone removal due to potential for spinal instability.

Simini Surgery Review Podcast

Know What Matters in the Literature - and Why

We distill peer-reviewed surgical studies into clinically relevant summaries and
exam-style questions, so you can make informed decisions with confidence.

Get Instant Access to Surgical Summaries

Free Access. No Spam. Just Smarter Surgical Learning

Multiple Choice Questions on this study

In Becker 2026 et al., on lumbar spine PLC biomechanics, which plane of movement exhibited no significant change in range of motion after either partial lateral corpectomy (PLC)?

A. Sagittal

B. Dorsal

C. Transverse

D. Frontal

E. Axial

Answer: Transverse

Explanation: Transverse (rotational) movement showed no significant change after one or two PLCs, unlike sagittal and dorsal planes.

In Becker 2026 et al., on lumbar spine PLC biomechanics, what was the percent increase in sagittal range of motion after both PLCs compared to intact spine?

A. 110%

B. 117%

C. 130%

D. 140%

E. 150%

Answer: 130%

Explanation: Sagittal ROM increased from baseline to 130% after the second PLC, reflecting a cumulative increase.

In Becker 2026 et al., on lumbar spine PLC biomechanics, what was the approximate torque threshold at which spinal segments with two PLCs failed during lateral bending?

A. 2 Nm

B. 8 Nm

C. 13 Nm

D. 20 Nm

E. 25 Nm

Answer: 13 Nm

Explanation: Segments with two PLCs failed at 13 Nm in lateral bending, well above the physiological 2 Nm load.

In Becker 2026 et al., on lumbar spine PLC biomechanics, what explanation was given for the preservation of rotational stability despite PLCs?

A. Preservation of intervertebral discs

B. Passive stabilizing system compensates

C. Facet joints and lamina remained intact

D. Paraspinal muscles preserved

E. Central canal expansion reduces torque

Answer: Facet joints and lamina remained intact

Explanation: Rotational stability was attributed to the integrity of facet joints and dorsal structures, which were not affected by PLCs.

In Becker 2026 et al., on lumbar spine PLC biomechanics, how did the second PLC compare biomechanically to the first in terms of passive range of motion increase?

A. It had a significantly greater destabilizing effect

B. It caused no additional change

C. It caused less increase than the first

D. It caused a similar magnitude of increase

E. It caused a greater increase only in flexion

Answer: It caused a similar magnitude of increase

Explanation: Both the first and second PLCs significantly increased ROM, but the second did not have a greater effect than the first.

Access the full library of surgical summaries and exam-style questions.

Get Instant Access