2019 ◽  
pp. 178-182
Author(s):  
Umit Kocaman ◽  
Hakan Yilmaz

Background. The aim of this study was to evaluate screw pull-out rates after fusion operations with short and thin pedicle screws.Methods. A total of 200 posterior lumbar and thoracolumbar fusion operations performed at our clinic with short and thin pedicle screws (5.5x35 mm) were retrospectively evaluated. The patients were assessed with computed tomography postoperatively on the day of surgery and at the 6th month. Single groove retraction of the transpedicular screw was evaluated as pull-out. The results were evaluated by the 'number of pull-out cases / total number of cases' and also the 'total number of pull-out screws / total number of screws used' ratios. Results. There were 112 (56%) female and 88 (44%) male patients with a mean age of 58 years. The total number of screws used in the 200 cases was 1188. There were 88 (7.4%) thoracic pedicle screws, 1056 (88.9%) lumbar pedicle screws and 44 (3.7%) sacral pedicle screws used. No pull-out was found in the control CTs taken postoperatively. Left side T11 and T12 pull-out was observed in one case and left L4 pull-out was observed in another case in the control CTs taken at the postoperative 6th month. Pull-out was observed in 2 (1%) of the 200 cases and 3 (0.25%) of the 1188 screws.Conclusions. All the short and thin pedicle screws used had passed the pedicle length and neurocentral junction. The use of a 5.5x35 mm screws in fusion operations is less invasive than using longer and thicker screws while the pull-out rates may be similar.


Spine ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 30 (18) ◽  
pp. 2113-2120 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy R. Kuklo ◽  
Benjamin K. Potter ◽  
David W. Polly ◽  
Lawrence G. Lenke

Spine ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 222-226 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy R. Kuklo ◽  
Lawrence G. Lenke ◽  
Michael F. O’Brien ◽  
Ronald A. Lehman ◽  
David W. Polly ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 129 ◽  
pp. e102
Author(s):  
Elana R. Goldenkoff ◽  
Joshua Mergos ◽  
Daniella Minecan

2007 ◽  
Vol 7 (5) ◽  
pp. 36S ◽  
Author(s):  
Jahangir Asghar ◽  
David Clements ◽  
Joshua Pahys ◽  
Amer Samdani ◽  
Linda D'Andrea ◽  
...  

2004 ◽  
Vol 100 (4) ◽  
pp. 325-331 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert F. Heary ◽  
Christopher M. Bono ◽  
Margaret Black

Object. The authors evaluated the accuracy of placement of thoracic pedicle screws by performing postoperative computerized tomography (CT) scanning. A grading system is presented by which screw placement is classified in relation to neurological, bone, and intrathoracic landmarks. Methods. One hundred eighty-five thoracic pedicle screws were implanted in 27 patients with the assistance of computer image guidance or fluoroscopy. Postoperative CT scanning was conducted to determine a grade for each screw: Grade I, entirely contained within pedicle; Grade II, violates lateral pedicle but screw tip entirely contained within the vertebral body (VB); Grade III, tip penetrates anterior or lateral VB; Grade IV, breaches medial or inferior pedicle; and Grade V, violates pedicle or VB and endangers spinal cord, nerve root, or great vessels and requires immediate revision. Based on anatomical morphometry, the spine was subdivided into upper (T1–2), middle (T3–6), and lower (T7–12) regions. Statistical analyses were performed to compare regions. The mean follow-up period was 37.6 months. The following postoperative CT scanning—documented grades were determined: Grade I, 160 screws (86.5%); Grade II, 15 (8.1%); Grade III, six (3.2%); Grade IV, three (1.6%); and Grade V, one (0.5%). Among cases involving screw misplacements, Grade II placement was most common, and this occurred most frequently in the middle thoracic region. Conclusions. The authors' grading system has advantages over those previously described; however, further study to determine its reliability, reproducibility, and predictive value of clinical sequelae is warranted. Postoperative CT scanning should be considered the gold standard for evaluating thoracic pedicle screw placement.


2012 ◽  
Vol 132 (10) ◽  
pp. 1371-1377 ◽  
Author(s):  
Markus Beck ◽  
Robert Rotter ◽  
Georg Gradl ◽  
Philipp Herlyn ◽  
Markus Kröber ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document