Radiation Exposure During Fluoroscopically-Assisted Pedicle Screw Insertion

Neurosurgery ◽  
1999 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
pp. 710-711
Author(s):  
Kevin Foley ◽  
Y. Raja Rampersaud ◽  
Alfred C. Shen ◽  
Scott Williams ◽  
Milo Solomito
2015 ◽  
Vol 5 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. s-0035-1554581-s-0035-1554581
Author(s):  
José Vicente Ballesteros Plaza ◽  
Ratko Jovan Yurac Barrientos ◽  
Enrique Andrés Viveros Pereira

Spine ◽  
2000 ◽  
Vol 25 (20) ◽  
pp. 2637-2645 ◽  
Author(s):  
Y. Raja Rampersaud ◽  
Kevin T. Foley ◽  
Alfred C. Shen ◽  
Scott Williams ◽  
Milo Solomito

Author(s):  
José Miguel Spirig ◽  
Shayan Golshani ◽  
Nadja A. Farshad-Amacker ◽  
Mazda Farshad

OBJECTIVE Patient-specific template-guided (TG) pedicle screw placement currently achieves the highest reported accuracy in cadaveric and early clinical studies, with reports of reduced use of radiation and less surgical time. However, a clinical randomized controlled trial (RCT) eliminating potential biases is lacking. This study compares TG and standard freehand (FH) pedicle screw insertion techniques in an RCT. METHODS Twenty-four patients (mean age 64 years, 9 men and 15 women) scheduled consecutively and independently from this study for 1-, 2-, or 3-level lumbar fusion were randomized to either the FH (n = 12) or TG (n = 12) group. Accuracy of pedicle screw placement, intraoperative parameters, and short-term complications were compared. RESULTS A total of 112 screws (58 FH and 54 TG screws) were implanted in the lumbar spine. Radiation exposure was significantly less in the TG group (78.0 ± 46.3 cGycm2) compared with the FH group (234.1 ± 138.1 cGycm2, p = 0.001). There were 4 pedicle screw perforations (6.9%) in the FH group and 2 (3.7%) in the TG group (p > 0.99), with no clinical consequences. Clinically relevant complications were 1 postoperative pedicle fracture in the FH group (p > 0.99), 1 infection in the FH group, and 2 infections in the TG group (p > 0.99). There were no significant differences in surgical exposure time, screw insertion time, overall surgical time, or blood loss between the FH and TG groups. CONCLUSIONS In this RCT, patient-specific TG pedicle screw insertion in the lumbar region achieved a high accuracy, but not better than a standardized FH technique. Even if intraoperative radiation exposure is less with the TG technique, the need for a preoperative CT scan counterbalances this advantage. However, more difficult trajectories might reveal potential benefits of the TG technique and need further research.


Spine ◽  
2000 ◽  
Vol 25 (12) ◽  
pp. 1538-1541 ◽  
Author(s):  
David P. Gwynne Jones ◽  
Peter A. Robertson ◽  
Brian Lunt ◽  
Med Phys ◽  
Suzanne A. Jackson

2019 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 139-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Camilo A. Molina ◽  
Nicholas Theodore ◽  
A. Karim Ahmed ◽  
Erick M. Westbroek ◽  
Yigal Mirovsky ◽  
...  

OBJECTIVEAugmented reality (AR) is a novel technology that has the potential to increase the technical feasibility, accuracy, and safety of conventional manual and robotic computer-navigated pedicle insertion methods. Visual data are directly projected to the operator’s retina and overlaid onto the surgical field, thereby removing the requirement to shift attention to a remote display. The objective of this study was to assess the comparative accuracy of AR-assisted pedicle screw insertion in comparison to conventional pedicle screw insertion methods.METHODSFive cadaveric male torsos were instrumented bilaterally from T6 to L5 for a total of 120 inserted pedicle screws. Postprocedural CT scans were obtained, and screw insertion accuracy was graded by 2 independent neuroradiologists using both the Gertzbein scale (GS) and a combination of that scale and the Heary classification, referred to in this paper as the Heary-Gertzbein scale (HGS). Non-inferiority analysis was performed, comparing the accuracy to freehand, manual computer-navigated, and robotics-assisted computer-navigated insertion accuracy rates reported in the literature. User experience analysis was conducted via a user experience questionnaire filled out by operators after the procedures.RESULTSThe overall screw placement accuracy achieved with the AR system was 96.7% based on the HGS and 94.6% based on the GS. Insertion accuracy was non-inferior to accuracy reported for manual computer-navigated pedicle insertion based on both the GS and the HGS scores. When compared to accuracy reported for robotics-assisted computer-navigated insertion, accuracy achieved with the AR system was found to be non-inferior when assessed with the GS, but superior when assessed with the HGS. Last, accuracy results achieved with the AR system were found to be superior to results obtained with freehand insertion based on both the HGS and the GS scores. Accuracy results were not found to be inferior in any comparison. User experience analysis yielded “excellent” usability classification.CONCLUSIONSAR-assisted pedicle screw insertion is a technically feasible and accurate insertion method.


2005 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 123
Author(s):  
Young Joon Ahn ◽  
Choon Sung Lee ◽  
Ji Hyo Kim ◽  
Kyeong Il Jeong ◽  
Yung Tae Kim

2009 ◽  
Vol 18 (9) ◽  
pp. 1300-1313 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heiko Koller ◽  
Wolfgang Hitzl ◽  
Frank Acosta ◽  
Mark Tauber ◽  
Juliane Zenner ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document