BACKGROUND CONTEXT To achieve clinical success in minimally invasive spinal approaches to deformity correction, the optimal construct should provide sound biomechanics without limiting lordotic correction. Anterior column realignment (ACR) is a powerful, but highly destabilizing minimally invasive technique for sagittal realignment with growing popularity; however, the biomechanics of this construct have never been previously investigated in a biomechanical study. In particular, it is unclear to what degree lateral plate fixation across the ACR construct constrains segmental lordosis and promotes improved biomechanics, nor whether supplemental rod fixation provides additional biomechanical benefit. PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to comprehensively evaluate the effect of ACR design on radiographic lordosis, range of motion (ROM) stability, and rod strain (RS) in a cadaveric model. We hypothesized that anterolateral fixation and four-rod (4R) supplementation would decrease rod strain (RS) and improve segmental stability (ROM) in a cadaveric ACR model. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING In vitro biomechanical study using human cadaveric specimens. PATIENT SAMPLE Seven fresh-frozen lumbar spine cadaveric specimens (T12–sacrum) were selected for this study (2F/5M, 52±13yrs, DEXA 1.02g/cm2). OUTCOME MEASURES Primary outcome measure of interest was maximum segmental lordosis measured using lateral radiograph. Secondary outcomes were range of motion (ROM) stability and posterior rod strain (RS) at L3/4. METHODS Standard nondestructive flexibility tests (7.5 Nm) were performed following 30° ACR at L3/4 and pedicle screw fixation from L1 to S1. First, maximum lordosis was measured after no osteotomies (G0), grade 1 (G1), and grade 2 (G2) osteotomies with either single screw lateral fixation (ACR+1XLP) or screws into both L3 and L4 (ACR+2XLP). Uni-axial strain gauges were placed midway between L3/L4 pedicle screws on the posterior surface of right rod. ROM and RS were recorded during applications of continuous dynamic loads in a 6DOF robot in flexion (FL), extension (EX), compression (C), lateral bending (LB), and axial rotation (AR). Conditions included: 1) intact, 2) intact+pedicle screws and 2 rods (PSR+2R), 3) ACR+1XLP+2R, 4) ACR+2XLP+2R, 5) ACR+1XLP+4 rods, 6) ACR+2XLP+4R. Data were analyzed using RM-ANOVA (p RESULTS Mean segmental lordosis increased from G0 (14.9°), to G1(18.7°), to G2(29.7°). There were no differences between 1XLP or 2XLP(p>.15). ACR+1XLP+2R was less stable than all other ACR conditions in FL, EX, and AR (p .48). Adding extra rods to ACR+1XLP and ACR+2XLP reduced primary rod strain in all directions of loading (p .16). There was no difference in strain between ACR+2XLP+2R and ACR+2XLP+4R (p>.48). CONCLUSIONS The ACR is a highly destabilizing procedure. For maximum stability, ACR constructs should contain either 2-screw fixation or 4 rods. Anterolateral fixation with two screws can be used without compromising the maximal achievable lordosis, but do not provide the same RS reduction as 4 rods. Combining these two techniques did not provide any additional benefit. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.