scholarly journals Percutaneous placement of lumbar pedicle screws via intraoperative CT image–based augmented reality–guided technology

2020 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 542-547 ◽  
Author(s):  
Huan Liu ◽  
Junlong Wu ◽  
Yu Tang ◽  
Haiyin Li ◽  
Wenkai Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Augmented Reality ◽  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Pedicle Screws ◽  
Clinical Situation ◽  
Ct Image ◽  
Alignment Method ◽  
Intraoperative Ct ◽  
Screw Perforation ◽  
Automatic Alignment ◽  
Lumbar Pedicle

OBJECTIVEThe authors aimed to assess, in a bone-agar experimental setting, the feasibility and accuracy of percutaneous lumbar pedicle screw placements using an intraoperative CT image–based augmented reality (AR)–guided method compared to placements using a radiograph-guided method. They also compared two AR hologram alignment methods.METHODSTwelve lumbar spine sawbones were completely embedded in hardened opaque agar, and a cubic marker was fixed on each phantom. After intraoperative CT, a 3D model of each phantom was generated, and a specialized application was deployed into an AR headset (Microsoft HoloLens). One hundred twenty pedicle screws, simulated by Kirschner wires (K-wires), were placed by two experienced surgeons, who each placed a total of 60 screws: 20 placed with a radiograph-guided technique, 20 with an AR technique in which the hologram was manually aligned, and 20 with an AR technique in which the hologram was automatically aligned. For each K-wire, the insertion path was expanded to a 6.5-mm diameter to simulate a lumbar pedicle screw. CT imaging of each phantom was performed after all K-wire placements, and the operative time required for each K-wire placement was recorded. An independent radiologist rated all images of K-wire placements. Outcomes were classified as grade I (no pedicle perforation), grade II (screw perforation of the cortex by up to 2 mm), or grade III (screw perforation of the cortex by > 2 mm). In a clinical situation, placements scored as grade I or II would be acceptable and safe for patients.RESULTSAmong all screw placements, 75 (94%) of 80 AR-guided placements and 40 (100%) of 40 radiograph-guided placements were acceptable (i.e., grade I or II; p = 0.106). Radiograph-guided placements had more grade I outcomes than the AR-guided method (p < 0.0001). The accuracy of the two AR alignment methods (p = 0.526) was not statistically significantly different, and neither was it different between the AR and radiograph groups (p < 0.0001). AR-guided placements required less time than the radiograph-guided placements (mean ± standard deviation, 131.76 ± 24.57 vs 181.43 ± 15.82 seconds, p < 0.0001). Placements performed using the automatic-alignment method required less time than those using the manual-alignment method (124.20 ± 23.80 vs 139.33 ± 23.21 seconds, p = 0.0081).CONCLUSIONSIn bone-agar experimental settings, AR-guided percutaneous lumbar pedicle screw placements were acceptable and more efficient than radiograph-guided placements. In a comparison of the two AR-guided placements, the automatic-alignment method was as accurate as the manual method but more efficient. Because of some limitations, the AR-guided system cannot be recommended in a clinical setting until there is significant improvement of this technology.

Augmented reality–assisted pedicle screw insertion: a cadaveric proof-of-concept study

2019 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 139-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Camilo A. Molina ◽  
Nicholas Theodore ◽  
A. Karim Ahmed ◽  
Erick M. Westbroek ◽  
Yigal Mirovsky ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Augmented Reality ◽  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
User Experience ◽  
Pedicle Screws ◽  
Screw Insertion ◽  
Pedicle Screw Insertion ◽  
Insertion Method ◽  
Comparative Accuracy ◽  
Placement Accuracy ◽  
Surgical Field

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.

scholarly journals Confirmation of accuracy/inaccuracy of lumbar pedicle screw placement using postoperative computed tomography

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 518
Author(s):  
Mohamed M. Arnaout ◽  
Magdy O. ElSheikh ◽  
Mansour A. Makia
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Pedicle Screws ◽  
Operative Intervention ◽  
Screw Placement ◽  
Lumbar Spine Surgery ◽  
Pedicle Screw Placement ◽  
Lumbar Pedicle ◽  
Ct Studies

Background: Transpedicular screws are extensively utilized in lumbar spine surgery. The placement of these screws is typically guided by anatomical landmarks and intraoperative fluoroscopy. Here, we utilized 2-week postoperative computed tomography (CT) studies to confirm the accuracy/inaccuracy of lumbar pedicle screw placement in 145 patients and correlated these findings with clinical outcomes. Methods: Over 6 months, we prospectively evaluated the location of 612 pedicle screws placed in 145 patients undergoing instrumented lumbar fusions addressing diverse pathology with instability. Routine anteroposterior and lateral plain radiographs were obtained 48 h after the surgery, while CT scans were obtained at 2 postoperative weeks (i.e., ideally these should have been performed intraoperatively or within 24–48 h of surgery). Results: Of the 612 screws, minor misplacement of screws (≤2 mm) was seen in 104 patients, moderate misplacement in 34 patients (2–4 mm), and severe misplacement in 7 patients (>4 mm). Notably, all the latter 7 (4.8% of the 145) patients required repeated operative intervention. Conclusion: Transpedicular screw insertion in the lumbar spine carries the risks of pedicle medial/lateral violation that is best confirmed on CT rather than X-rays/fluoroscopy alone. Here, we additional found 7 patients (4.8%) who with severe medial/lateral pedicle breach who warranting repeated operative intervention. In the future, CT studies should be performed intraoperatively or within 24–48 h of surgery to confirm the location of pedicle screws and rule in our out medial or lateral pedicle breaches.

scholarly journals A Novel Augmented-Reality-Based Surgical Navigation System for Spine Surgery in a Hybrid Operating Room: Design, Workflow, and Clinical Applications

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (5) ◽  
pp. 496-502 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erik Edström ◽  
Gustav Burström ◽  
Rami Nachabe ◽  
Paul Gerdhem ◽  
Adrian Elmi Terander
Keyword(s):  
Augmented Reality ◽  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Operating Room ◽  
Wound Closure ◽  
Surgical Navigation ◽  
Pedicle Screws ◽  
Screw Placement ◽  
Hybrid Operating Room ◽  
Pedicle Screw Placement

Abstract BACKGROUND Treatment of several spine disorders requires placement of pedicle screws. Detailed 3-dimensional (3D) anatomic information facilitates this process and improves accuracy. OBJECTIVE To present a workflow for a novel augmented-reality-based surgical navigation (ARSN) system installed in a hybrid operating room for anatomy visualization and instrument guidance during pedicle screw placement. METHODS The workflow includes surgical exposure, imaging, automatic creation of a 3D model, and pedicle screw path planning for instrument guidance during surgery as well as the actual screw placement, spinal fixation, and wound closure and intraoperative verification of the treatment results. Special focus was given to process integration and minimization of overhead time. Efforts were made to manage staff radiation exposure avoiding the need for lead aprons. Time was kept throughout the procedure and subdivided to reflect key steps. The navigation workflow was validated in a trial with 20 cases requiring pedicle screw placement (13/20 scoliosis). RESULTS Navigated interventions were performed with a median total time of 379 min per procedure (range 232-548 min for 4-24 implanted pedicle screws). The total procedure time was subdivided into surgical exposure (28%), cone beam computed tomography imaging and 3D segmentation (2%), software planning (6%), navigated surgery for screw placement (17%) and non-navigated instrumentation, wound closure, etc (47%). CONCLUSION Intraoperative imaging and preparation for surgical navigation totaled 8% of the surgical time. Consequently, ARSN can routinely be used to perform highly accurate surgery potentially decreasing the risk for complications and revision surgery while minimizing radiation exposure to the staff.

Accuracy of percutaneous lumbar pedicle screw placement using the oblique or “owl's-eye” view and novel guidance technology

2010 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 509-515 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cary Idler ◽  
Kevin W. Rolfe ◽  
Josef E. Gorek
Keyword(s):  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Facet Joint ◽  
Pedicle Screws ◽  
Guidance System ◽  
Screw Placement ◽  
Pedicle Screw Placement ◽  
Screw Insertion ◽  
Percutaneous Pedicle Screw ◽  
Clinical Series ◽  
Lumbar Pedicle

Object This study was conducted to assess the in vivo safety and accuracy of percutaneous lumbar pedicle screw placement using the owl's-eye view of the pedicle axis and a new guidance technology system that facilitates orientation of the C-arm into the appropriate fluoroscopic view and the pedicle cannulation tool in the corresponding trajectory. Methods A total of 326 percutaneous pedicle screws were placed from L-3 to S-1 in 85 consecutive adult patients. Placement was performed using simple coaxial imaging of the pedicle with the owl's-eye fluoroscopic view. NeuroVision, a new guidance system using accelerometer technology, helped align the C-arm trajectory into the owl's-eye view and the cannulation tool in the same trajectory. Postoperative fine-cut CT scans were acquired to assess screw position. Medical records were reviewed for complications. Results Five of 326 screws breached a pedicle cortex—all breaches were less than 2 mm—for an accuracy rate of 98.47%. Five screws violated an adjacent facet joint. All were at the S-1 superior facet and included in a fusion. No screw violated an adjacent mobile facet or disc space. There were no cases of new or worsening neurological symptoms or deficits for an overall clinical accuracy of 100%. Conclusions The owl's-eye technique of coaxial pedicle imaging with the C-arm fluoroscopy, facilitated by NeuroVision, is a safe and accurate means by which to place percutaneous pedicle screws for degenerative conditions of the lumbar spine. This is the largest series reported to use the oblique or owl's-eye projection for percutaneous pedicle screw insertion. The accuracy of percutaneous screw insertion with this technique meets or exceeds that of other reported clinical series or techniques.

scholarly journals Automatic localization of endoscope in intraoperative CT image: A simple approach to augmented reality guidance in laparoscopic surgery

2016 ◽  
Vol 30 ◽  
pp. 130-143 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sylvain Bernhardt ◽  
Stéphane A. Nicolau ◽  
Vincent Agnus ◽  
Luc Soler ◽  
Christophe Doignon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Laparoscopic Surgery ◽  
Augmented Reality ◽  
Simple Approach ◽  
Ct Image ◽  
Intraoperative Ct ◽  
Automatic Localization

scholarly journals CT-to-fluoroscopy registration versus scan-and-plan registration for robot-assisted insertion of lumbar pedicle screws

2022 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
pp. E8
Keyword(s):  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Lumbar Fusion ◽  
Pedicle Screws ◽  
Retrospective Chart Review ◽  
Robot Assisted ◽  
Registration Method ◽  
Screw Insertion ◽  
Pedicle Screw Insertion ◽  
Radiology Reports ◽  
Lumbar Pedicle

OBJECTIVE Pedicle screw insertion for stabilization after lumbar fusion surgery is commonly performed by spine surgeons. With the advent of navigation technology, the accuracy of pedicle screw insertion has increased. Robotic guidance has revolutionized the placement of pedicle screws with 2 distinct radiographic registration methods, the scan-and-plan method and CT-to-fluoroscopy method. In this study, the authors aimed to compare the accuracy and safety of these methods. METHODS A retrospective chart review was conducted at 2 centers to obtain operative data for consecutive patients who underwent robot-assisted lumbar pedicle screw placement. The newest robotic platform (Mazor X Robotic System) was used in all cases. One center used the scan-and-plan registration method, and the other used CT-to-fluoroscopy for registration. Screw accuracy was determined by applying the Gertzbein-Robbins scale. Fluoroscopic exposure times were collected from radiology reports. RESULTS Overall, 268 patients underwent pedicle screw insertion, 126 patients with scan-and-plan registration and 142 with CT-to-fluoroscopy registration. In the scan-and-plan cohort, 450 screws were inserted across 266 spinal levels (mean 1.7 ± 1.1 screws/level), with 446 (99.1%) screws classified as Gertzbein-Robbins grade A (within the pedicle) and 4 (0.9%) as grade B (< 2-mm deviation). In the CT-to-fluoroscopy cohort, 574 screws were inserted across 280 lumbar spinal levels (mean 2.05 ± 1.7 screws/ level), with 563 (98.1%) grade A screws and 11 (1.9%) grade B (p = 0.17). The scan-and-plan cohort had nonsignificantly less fluoroscopic exposure per screw than the CT-to-fluoroscopy cohort (12 ± 13 seconds vs 11.1 ± 7 seconds, p = 0.3). CONCLUSIONS Both scan-and-plan registration and CT-to-fluoroscopy registration methods were safe, accurate, and had similar fluoroscopy time exposure overall.

Comparison of Open and Percutaneous Lumbar Pedicle Screw Revision Rate Using 3-D Image Guidance and Intraoperative CT

Orthopedics ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. e129-e134 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward Rainier G. Santos ◽  
Jonathan N. Sembrano ◽  
Sharon C. Yson ◽  
David W. Polly
Keyword(s):  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Image Guidance ◽  
Revision Rate ◽  
Intraoperative Ct ◽  
Lumbar Pedicle

Percutaneous pedicle screw fixation of the lumbar spine: preliminary clinical results

2002 ◽  
Vol 97 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin T. Foley ◽  
Sanjay K. Gupta
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Screw Fixation ◽  
Pedicle Screws ◽  
Pedicle Screw Fixation ◽  
Posterior Fixation ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Insertion Device ◽  
Lumbar Pedicle ◽  
Fine Print

Object. Standard techniques for pedicle screw fixation of the lumbar spine involve open exposures and extensive muscle dissection. The purpose of this study was to report the initial clinical experience with a novel device for percutaneous posterior fixation of the lumbar spine. Methods. An existing multiaxial lumbar pedicle screw system was modified to allow screws to be placed percutaneously by using an extension sleeve that permits remote manipulation of the polyaxial screw heads and remote engagement of the screw-locking mechanism. A unique rod-insertion device was developed that linked to the screw extension sleeves, allowing for a precut and -contoured rod to be placed through a small stab wound. Because the insertion device relies on the geometrical constraint of the rod pathway through the screw heads, minimal manipulation is required to place the rods in a standard submuscular position, there is essentially no muscle dissection, and the need for direct visual feedback is avoided. Twelve patients (six men and six women) who ranged in age from 23 to 68 years underwent pedicle screw fixation in which the rod-insertion device was used. Spondylolisthesis was present in 10 patients and osseous nonunion of a prior interbody fusion was present in two. All patients underwent successful percutaneous fixation. Ten patients underwent single-level fusions (six at L5—S1, three at L4–5, and one at L2–3), and two underwent two-level fusions (one from L3–5 and the other from L4—S1). The follow-up period ranged from 10 to 19 months (mean 13.8 months). Conclusions. Although percutaneous lumbar pedicle screw placement has been described previously, longitudinal connector (rod or plate) insertion has been more problematic. The device used in this study allows for straightforward placement of lumbar pedicle screws and rods through percutaneous stab wounds. Paraspinous tissue trauma is minimized without compromising the quality of spinal fixation. Preliminary experience involving the use of this device has been promising.

Ability of electromyographic monitoring to determine the presence of malpositioned pedicle screws in the lumbosacral spine: analysis of 2450 consecutively placed screws

2011 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 130-135 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott L. Parker ◽  
Anubhav G. Amin ◽  
S. Harrison Farber ◽  
Matthew J. McGirt ◽  
Daniel M. Sciubba ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Positive Response ◽  
False Negative ◽  
Pedicle Screws ◽  
Ct Scanning ◽  
False Positives ◽  
Ct Scans ◽  
Lumbosacral Spine ◽  
Anatomical Landmarks ◽  
Lumbar Pedicle

Object Pedicle screws provide efficient stabilization along all 3 columns of the spine, but they can be technically demanding to place, with malposition rates ranging from 5% to 10%. Intraoperative electromyographic (EMG) monitoring has the capacity to objectively identify a screw breaching the medial pedicle cortex that is in proximity to a nerve root. The purpose of this study is to describe and evaluate the authors' 7-year institutional experience with intraoperative EMG monitoring during placement of lumbar pedicle screws and to determine the clinical utility of intraoperative EMG monitoring. Methods The authors retrospectively studied 2450 consecutive lumbar pedicle screws placed in 418 patients from June 2002 through June 2009. All screws were inserted using a free-hand technique and anatomical landmarks, stimulated at 10.0 mA, and evaluated with CT scanning within 48 hours postoperatively. Medial pedicle screw breach was defined as having greater than 25% of the screw diameter extend outside of the pedicle, as confirmed on CT scanning or intraoperatively by a positive EMG response indicating a medial breach. The sensitivity and specificity of intraoperative EMG monitoring in detecting the presence of a medial screw breach was evaluated based on the following definitions: 1) true positive (a positive response to EMG stimulation confirmed as a breach intraoperatively or on postoperative CT scans); 2) false positive (positive response to EMG stimulation confirmed as a correctly positioned screw on postoperative CT scans); 3) true negative (no response to EMG stimulation confirmed as a correctly positioned screw on postoperative CT scans); or 4) false negative (no response to EMG stimulation but confirmed as a breach on postoperative CT scans). Results One hundred fifteen pedicle screws (4.7%) showed positive stimulation during intraoperative EMG monitoring. At stimulation thresholds less than 5.0, 5.0–8.0, and > 8.0 mA, the specificity of a positive response was 99.9%, 97.9%, and 95.9%, respectively. The sensitivity of a positive response at these thresholds was only 43.4%, 69.6%, and 69.6%, respectively. At a threshold less than 5.0 mA, 91% of screws with a positive EMG response were confirmed as true medial breaches. However, at thresholds of 5.0–8.0 mA or greater than 8.0 mA, a positive EMG response was associated with 89% and 100% false positives (no breaches), respectively. Conclusions When using intraoperative EMG monitoring, a positive response at screw stimulation thresholds less than 5.0 mA was highly specific for a medial pedicle screw breach but was poorly sensitive. A positive response to stimulation thresholds greater 5.0 mA was associated with a very high rate of false positives. The authors' experience suggests that pedicle screws showing positive stimulation below 5.0 mA warrants intraoperative investigation for malpositioning while responses at higher thresholds are less reliable at accurately representing a medial breach.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document