Navigated minimally invasive thoracolumbar pedicle screw placement with flat panel 3-D imaging. A feasibility study

2010 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 101-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Musa Citak ◽  
Timo Stubig ◽  
Daniel Kendoff ◽  
Mustafa Citak ◽  
Padhraig F. O'Loughlin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Feasibility Study ◽  
Screw Placement ◽  
Pedicle Screw Placement ◽  
Flat Panel

scholarly journals Radiographic Accuracy of Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Placement in Fluoroscopic- Versus CT Navigation-Guided Lumbar Spine Instrumentation

Neurosurgery ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 66 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Guang-Ting Cong ◽  
Avani Vaishnav ◽  
Joseph Barbera ◽  
Hiroshi Kumagai ◽  
James Dowdell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Spinal Instrumentation ◽  
Screw Placement ◽  
Pedicle Screw Placement ◽  
Intraoperative Computed Tomography ◽  
Percutaneous Pedicle Screw ◽  
Spine Instrumentation ◽  
Surgical Methods

Abstract INTRODUCTION Posterior spinal instrumentation for fusion using intraoperative computed tomography (CT) navigation is gaining traction as an alternative to the conventional two-dimensional fluoroscopic-guided approach to percutaneous pedicle screw placement. However, few studies to date have directly compared outcomes of these 2 minimally invasive instrumentation methods. METHODS A consecutive cohort of patients undergoing primary percutaneous posterior lumbar spine instrumentation for spine fusion was retrospectively reviewed. Revision surgeries or cases converted to open were excluded. Accuracy of screw placement was assessed using a postoperative CT scan with blinding to the surgical methods used. The Gertzbein-Robbins classification was used to grade cortical breach: Grade 0 (<0 mm cortical breach), Grade I (<2 mm), Grade II (2-4 mm), Grade III (4-6 mm), and Grade IV (>6 mm). RESULTS CT navigation was found to significantly improve accuracy of screw placement (P < .022). There was significantly more facet violation of the unfused level in the fluoroscopy group vs the CT group (9% vs 0.5%; P < .0001). There was also a higher proportion of poor screw placement in the fluoroscopy group (10.1% vs 3.6%). No statistical difference was found in the rate of tip breach, inferomedial breach, or lateral breach. Regression analysis showed that fluoroscopy had twice the odds of incurring poor screw placement as compared to CT navigation. CONCLUSION This radiographic study comparing screw placement in minimally invasive fluoroscopy- vs CT navigation-guided lumbar spine instrumentation provides evidence that CT navigation significantly improves accuracy of screw placement, especially in optimizing the screw trajectory so as to avoid facet violation. Long-term follow-up studies should be performed to ascertain whether this difference can contribute to an improvement in clinical outcomes.

scholarly journals Feasibility and Accuracy of Thoracolumbar Minimally Invasive Pedicle Screw Placement With Augmented Reality Navigation Technology

Spine ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 43 (14) ◽  
pp. 1018-1023 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adrian Elmi-Terander ◽  
Rami Nachabe ◽  
Halldor Skulason ◽  
Kyrre Pedersen ◽  
Michael Söderman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Augmented Reality ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Screw Placement ◽  
Pedicle Screw Placement

scholarly journals Minimally invasive guidewireless, navigated pedicle screw placement: a technical report and case series

2017 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. E9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brandon W. Smith ◽  
Jacob R. Joseph ◽  
Michael Kirsch ◽  
Mary Oakley Strasser ◽  
Jacob Smith ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Kirschner Wire ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Pedicle Screws ◽  
Screw Placement ◽  
Pedicle Screw Placement ◽  
Minimally Invasive Spinal Surgery ◽  
Screw Insertion ◽  
Percutaneous Pedicle Screw

OBJECTIVEPercutaneous pedicle screw insertion (PPSI) is a mainstay of minimally invasive spinal surgery. Traditionally, PPSI is a fluoroscopy-guided, multistep process involving traversing the pedicle with a Jamshidi needle, placement of a Kirschner wire (K-wire), placement of a soft-tissue dilator, pedicle tract tapping, and screw insertion over the K-wire. This study evaluates the accuracy and safety of PPSI with a simplified 2-step process using a navigated awl-tap followed by navigated screw insertion without use of a K-wire or fluoroscopy.METHODSPatients undergoing PPSI utilizing the K-wire–less technique were identified. Data were extracted from the electronic medical record. Complications associated with screw placement were recorded. Postoperative radiographs as well as CT were evaluated for accuracy of pedicle screw placement.RESULTSThirty-six patients (18 male and 18 female) were included. The patients’ mean age was 60.4 years (range 23.8–78.4 years), and their mean body mass index was 28.5 kg/m2 (range 20.8–40.1 kg/m2). A total of 238 pedicle screws were placed. A mean of 6.6 pedicle screws (range 4–14) were placed over a mean of 2.61 levels (range 1–7). No pedicle breaches were identified on review of postoperative radiographs. In a subgroup analysis of the 25 cases (69%) in which CT scans were performed, 173 screws were assessed; 170 (98.3%) were found to be completely within the pedicle, and 3 (1.7%) demonstrated medial breaches of less than 2 mm (Grade B). There were no complications related to PPSI in this cohort.CONCLUSIONSThis streamlined 2-step K-wire–less, navigated PPSI appears safe and accurate and avoids the need for radiation exposure to surgeon and staff.

Clinical Assessment of Percutaneous Lumbar Pedicle Screw Placement Using the O-Arm Multidimensional Surgical Imaging System

Neurosurgery ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 70 (4) ◽  
pp. 990-995 ◽  
Author(s):  
John K. Houten ◽  
Rani Nasser ◽  
Nrupen Baxi
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Imaging System ◽  
Intraoperative Imaging ◽  
Lumbar Fusion ◽  
Pedicle Screws ◽  
Screw Placement ◽  
Pedicle Screw Placement ◽  
Percutaneous Pedicle Screw ◽  
Clinical Series

Abstract BACKGROUND: Increasing popularity of minimally invasive surgery for lumbar fusion has led to dependence upon intraoperative fluoroscopy for pedicle screw placement, because limited muscle dissection does not expose the bony anatomy necessary for traditional, freehand techniques nor for registration steps in image-guidance techniques. This has raised concerns about cumulative radiation exposure for both surgeon and operating room staff. The recent introduction of the O-arm Multidimensional Surgical Imaging System allows for percutaneous placement of pedicle screws, but there is limited clinical experience with the technique and data examining its accuracy. OBJECTIVE: We present the first large clinical series of percutaneous screw placement using navigation of O-arm imaging and compare the results with the fluoroscopy-guided method. METHODS: A retrospective review of a 24-month period identified patients undergoing minimally invasive lumbar interbody fusion. The O-arm was introduced in the middle of this period and was used for all subsequent patients. Accuracy of screw placement was assessed by examination of axial computed tomography or O-arm scans. RESULTS: The fluoroscopy group included 141 screws in 42 patients, and the O-arm group included 205 screws in 52 patients. The perforation rate was 12.8% in the fluoroscopy group and 3% in the O-arm group (P &lt; .001). Single-level O-arm procedures took a mean 200 (153–241) minutes, whereas fluoroscopy took 221 (178–302) minutes (P &lt; .03). CONCLUSION: Percutaneous pedicle screw placement with the O-arm Multidimensional Intraoperative Imaging System is a safe and effective technique and provided improved overall accuracy and reduced operative time compared with conventional fluoroscopic techniques.

scholarly journals Accuracy of Robot-Assisted Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Placement Under Regional Anaesthesia: A Comparative Cohort Study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shangju Gao ◽  
Jingchao Wei ◽  
Wenyi Li ◽  
Long Zhang ◽  
Can Cao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
General Anaesthesia ◽  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Regional Anaesthesia ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Screw Placement ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Pedicle Screw Placement ◽  
Robot Assisted ◽  
Percutaneous Pedicle Screw

Abstract Background: Robot-assisted pedicle screw placement is usually performed under general anaesthesia to keep the body still. The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of the robot-assisted technique under regional anaesthesia with conventional fluoroscopy-guided percutaneous pedicle screw placement under general anaesthesia in minimally invasive lumbar fusion surgery.Methods: Patients who underwent robot-assisted percutaneous endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (PELIF) or fluoroscopy-guided minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) from December 2017 to February 2020 in a single centre were included. Based on the method of percutaneous pedicle screw placement used, patients were divided into the robot-assisted under regional anaesthesia (group RE-RO) and fluoroscopy-guided under general anaesthesia (group GE-FLU) groups. The primary outcome measures were screw accuracy and the incidence of facet joint violation (FJV). Secondary outcome measures included X-ray exposure and intraoperative adverse events.Results: Eighteen patients were included in group RE-RO, and 23 patients were included in group GE-FLU. The percentages of clinically acceptable screws (Gertzbein and Robbins grades A and B) were 94.4% and 91.5%, respectively. There was no significant difference in the percentages of clinically acceptable screws (p=0.44) or overall Gertzbein and Robbins screw accuracy grades (p=0.35). Only the top screws were included in the analysis of FJVs. The percentages of FJV (Babu grades 1, 2 and 3) were 5.6% and 28.3%, respectively. This difference was statistically significant (p=0.01). Overall, the FJV grades in group RE-RO were significantly better than those in group GE-FLU (p=0.009). The mean fluoroscopy time for each screw in group RE-RO was significantly shorter than that in group GE-FLU (group RE-RO, 5.4±1.9 seconds, group GE-FLU, 6.8±2.0 seconds; P=0.03). The intraoperative adverse events included 1 case of registration failure and 1 case of guide-wire dislodgment in group RE-RO as well as 2 cases of screw misplacement in group GE-FLU. No complications related to anaesthesia were observed.Conclusion: Robot-assisted pedicle screw placement under regional anaesthesia can be performed effectively and safely. The accuracy is comparable to the conventional technique. Moreover, this technique has the advantage of fewer FJVs and a lower radiation time.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document