Accuracy and technical limits of percutaneous pedicle screw placement in the thoracolumbar spine

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yann Philippe Charles ◽  
Yves Ntilikina ◽  
Arnaud Collinet ◽  
Sébastien Schuller ◽  
Julien Garnon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Thoracolumbar Spine ◽  
Screw Placement ◽  
Pedicle Screw Placement ◽  
Percutaneous Pedicle Screw

scholarly journals Thoracic spondylotic myelopathy presumably caused by diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis in a patient who underwent decompression and percutaneous pedicle screw fixation

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 2050313X2098779
Author(s):  
Shota Miyoshi ◽  
Tadao Morino ◽  
Haruhiko Takeda ◽  
Hiroshi Nakata ◽  
Masayuki Hino ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Screw Fixation ◽  
Diffuse Idiopathic Skeletal Hyperostosis ◽  
Pedicle Screw Fixation ◽  
Vertebral Bone ◽  
Bone Bridge ◽  
Percutaneous Pedicle Screw ◽  
Bilateral Lower Limb ◽  
Upper Thoracic ◽  
Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Fixation

A 74-year-old man developed bilateral lower limb spastic paresis. He was diagnosed with thoracic spondylotic myelopathy presumably caused by mechanical stress that was generated in the intervertebral space (T1-T2) between a vertebral bone bridge (C5-T1) due to diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis after anterior fixation of the lower cervical spine and a vertebral bone bridge (T2-T7) due to diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis in the upper thoracic spine. Treatment included posterior decompression (T1-T2 laminectomy) and percutaneous pedicle screw fixation at the C7-T4 level. Six months after surgery, the patient could walk with a cane, and the vertebral bodies T1-T2 were bridged without bone grafting. For thoracic spondylotic myelopathy associated with diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis, decompression and percutaneous pedicle screw fixation are effective therapies.

scholarly journals Safety and Efficacy of All-In-One Percutaneous Pedicle Screw System

2021 ◽  
pp. 219256822110114
Author(s):  
Atsushi Kojima ◽  
Takato Aihara ◽  
Makoto Urushibara ◽  
Kenji Hatakeyama ◽  
Tomonori Sodeyama
Keyword(s):  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Conventional Method ◽  
Surgical Time ◽  
Computed Tomography Images ◽  
Spine Stabilization ◽  
Percutaneous Pedicle Screw ◽  
Minimally Invasive Spine ◽  
Conventional Methods ◽  
Speed And Accuracy ◽  
Minimally Invasive Spine Stabilization

Study Design: Retrospective study of the prospectively collected outcomes data. Objective: The indications for PPS placement during minimally invasive spine stabilization (MISt) procedures have increased in recent years. To the best of our knowledge, no studies have documented the outcomes of PPS insertion using the all-in-one PPS system. This study compared the conventional methods and the use of all-in-one percutaneous pedicle screw (PPS) system with respect to the speed and accuracy of PPS placement. We also determined the advantages associated with the use of the all-in-one PPS system. Methods: We evaluated 54 patients who underwent PPS insertion using the conventional method and the all-in-one PPS system during MISt procedures. We also assessed the number of implanted PPSs, the time taken to implant PPSs, and the accuracy of PPS placement based on postoperative computed tomography images. Results: A total of 254 PPSs were inserted (126 using the conventional method and 128 using the all-in-one PPS system). The PPS insertion time with the all-in-one PPS system (mean, 25.3 ± 9.1 s) was significantly shorter than that using the conventional method (mean, 63.1 ± 13.0 s; P < 0.01). With respect to the accuracy of PPS insertion, ≥ 2 mm pedicle breach was noted in one case each in both groups. Conclusions: PPS placement using the all-in-one PPS system is as safe as conventional methods and has the potential to save the surgical time of MISt procedures.

scholarly journals Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery for Unstable Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures: A Case Series

2016 ◽  
Vol 02 (04) ◽  
pp. e131-e138 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nitin Agarwal ◽  
Phillip Choi ◽  
Raymond Sekula
Keyword(s):  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Screw Fixation ◽  
Burst Fracture ◽  
Pedicle Screw Fixation ◽  
Thoracolumbar Burst Fracture ◽  
Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures ◽  
Percutaneous Pedicle Screw ◽  
Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Fixation

Introduction Traumatic thoracolumbar burst fracture is a common pathology without a clear consensus on best treatment approach. Minimally invasive approaches are being investigated due to potential benefits in recovery time and morbidity. We examine long-term resolution of symptoms of traumatic thoracolumbar burst fractures treated with percutaneous posterior pedicle screw fixation. Methods Retrospective clinical review of seven patients with spinal trauma who presented with thoracolumbar burst fracture from July 2012 to April 2013 and were treated with percutaneous pedicle screw fixation. Electronic patient charts and radiographic imaging were reviewed for initial presentation, fracture characteristics, operative treatment, and postoperative course. Results The patients had a median age of 29 years (range 18 to 57), and 57% were men. The median Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity Scale score was 4 (range 2 to 9). All patients had proper screw placement and uneventful postoperative courses given the severity of their individual traumas. Five of seven patients were reached for long-term follow-up of greater than 28 months. Six of seven patients had excellent pain control and stability at their last follow-up. One patient required revision surgery for noncatastrophic hardware failure. Conclusion Percutaneous pedicle screw fixation for the treatment of unstable thoracolumbar burst fracture may provide patients with durable benefits and warrants further investigation.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document