## 1 Introduction  
Despite the commonly used techniques for surgical treatment of vertebral compression fractures in the thoracic or lumbar spine, the selection of the appropriate type of fixation is still open to debate. Prior experimental research conducted by the authors has demonstrated that employing long-segment fixation (LSF) in the design of a posterior spinal fixation system (PFS) yields superior outcomes compared to short-segment fixation (SSF) [1]. It was observed that a PFS design with a short-segment configuration does not offer sufficient stability, particularly during flexion-extension movements. Such a PFS design may lack the necessary rigidity, resulting in an excessive range of motion at the thoracolumbar junction [1]. In line with these findings, [PERSON] et al. [2] and [PERSON] et al. [3] reported immediate stabilization of the affected segment when implementing LSF, along with achieving higher stiffness values compared to those seen in physiological systems. These results align with the observations conducted by [PERSON] et al. [4], who demonstrated that a four-segment fixation is stiffer in comparison to a two-segment fixation. Compression fractures can often contribute to increased thoracic kybosis, leading to disorders of the physiological curvature of the spine and thus causing spinal imbalance [5, 6]. Conversely, pre-existing alterations in spinal curvature may influence how forcesare distributed, potentially predisposing to the occurrence of fractures. According to the studies by [PERSON] et al., it is imperative to acknowledge the complexity of the interaction between fractures and thoracic kyphosis, which likely operates bidirectionally [7]. Based on clinical practice, it was noted that surgical treatment of fractures allows for shorter hospitalization time, better correction of deformities in the region of the thoracic kyphosis, and the possibility of direct decompression of the spinal canal [8]. Furthermore, in order to achieve good clinical outcomes of treatment, it is crucial to reduce kyphosis and restore the correct sagittal alignment of the spine, which can be ensured by LSF [9]. Through an assessment of the correlation between thoracic kyphosis angle and clinical outcomes of treatment burst fractures of the thoracolumbar spine, [PERSON] et al. [10] observed that patients treated conservatively had greater deformities of the spinal curvature than patients treated surgically. [PERSON] et al. [11] systematically reviewed the literature spanning the years 2010-2020, focusing on investigations related to thoracolumbar fractures and kyphosis. Their findings indicated that unstable burst fractures represent a predominant etiological factor in the development of posttraumatic kyphosis. Consequently, it is advised that surgical intervention employing a PFS efficacy in effecting kyphosis correction is concomitant with diminished blood loss and mitigated complication rates. According to AO Foundation Surgery Reference, in the case of long-segment designs, the application of transverse connectors is a classic fixation technique that is used to improve the stability of the damaged spinal segment. The most popular PFS configurations use two connectors, resulting in the frame structure of the PFS. However, these types of systems are increasingly being replaced by a single transverse connector, as this significantly reduces the operation time. At the same time, there are ongoing discussions on the advisability of using transverse connectors in PFS designs. Present clinical standards are moving towards percutaneous minimally invasive surgery, which primarily protects the functional spinal units (spinal motion segments), thus significantly shortening the procedure and saving the materials used [9; 12; 13]. In contrast, the use of transverse connectors in a PFS design is associated with more invasive open surgery, during which the patient must be opened to insert implants, which is obviously associated with a longer operation time, major tissue disruption, and longer hospitalization.