With the recent development of newer imaging technique. and improved spinal procedures and devices, operative intervention has gained increasing favor. But, the anterior and posterior approach both have their advocated. The authors analysed the 40 patients who were treated with kaneda, Luque or Harrington instrumentation and were followed up at least one year. The results were as follows; 1. The most common cause of injury was falling down(60%), the most frequent injured level was L(43%), and the most commo type was burst fracture(56.8%). 2. Harrington instrumentation without sublaminar wiring showed greater loss of correction, and relatively many complications including hook dislodgement. But, they were not related to the clinical result. 3. The rate of neurological improvement above one grade by Frankel classification in neurologically impaired patients was not definitely different between anteriorly and posteriorly approached groups(75%:67%). 4. On the short term follow up, the adventages in the group using kaneda device were excellent ability of correction, short segmental fixation and almost complete decompression. But, the careful long term follow up was necessary about the possibility of the complications such as screw failure and right lateral wedging. 5. The surgical approach and method of decompression and instrumentation should be planned according to the type of fracture, the mechanism of injury and the time of injury. And ancillary considerations may play a significant role.