Effectiveness of Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Fixation for Traumatic Thoracolumbar Spine Fracture

Introduction: Surgical treatment of thoracolumbar fracture without neurological damage has resulted in better clinical and radiological outcome than conservative treatment. Traditional open approach is associated with extensive paravertebral muscle damage and postoperative morbidity so percutaneous pedicle screw fixation is highly valuable alternatives. Aims: to evaluate the efficacy and outcome of percutaneous pedicle screw fixation in the treatment of traumatic thoracolumbar fracture without neurological deficit. Methods: This study was conducted in Nepalgunj Medical College, Nepalgunj in a time span of one year; total of 40 patients were included and treated with percutaneous pedicle screw fixation and followed up for 6months. They were evaluated clinically and radiologically. Results: 40 patients with thoracolumbar fractures were managed with percutaneous pedicle screw fixation with a mean operative time of 77.30 min and intraoperative blood loss was 88.38ml. There was significant improvement in cobb’s angle (mean difference 13.92 degree), vertebral body height loss (mean difference 37.7%) and visual analogue scale (mean difference 3.55) postoperatively. These improvements remained statically significant at 6months follow up. Conclusion: Percutaneous pedicle screw fixation is safe, valid and effective treatment of thoracolumbar fracture without neurological deficit.

Accuracy of Robot-Assisted Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Placement under Regional Anesthesia: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Background. Robot-assisted pedicle screw placement is usually performed under general anesthesia to keep the body still. The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of the robot-assisted technique under regional anesthesia with that of conventional fluoroscopy-guided percutaneous pedicle screw placement under general anesthesia in minimally invasive lumbar fusion surgery. Methods. This study recruited patients who underwent robot-assisted percutaneous endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (PELIF) or fluoroscopy-guided minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) between December 2017 and February 2020 at a single center. Based on the method of percutaneous pedicle screw placement used, patients were divided into the robot-assisted under regional anesthesia (group RE-RO) and fluoroscopy-guided under general anesthesia (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 and visual analogue scale (VAS) scores which were used to evaluate the degree of the postoperative pain at 4 hours and on postoperative days 1, 2, and 3. Intraoperative adverse events were also recorded. 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 and group GE-FLU: 6.8 ± 2.0 seconds; p = 0.03 ). The postoperative pain between the RE-RO and GE-FLU groups was not statistically significant. 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 anesthesia were observed. Conclusion. Robot-assisted pedicle screw placement under regional anesthesia 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.

Comparison of Simultaneous Single-position Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Fixation with Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion using O-arm Navigated C-arm free Technique for Lumbar Degenerative Diseases

Background: To compare the clinical, surgical and radiographic outcomes of O-arm navigated C-arm free, simultaneous single-position oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) and percutaneous pedicle screw (PPS) fixation with minimally invasive posterior/ transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-PLIF/TLIF).Methods: This is retrospective comparative study. The study included 98 patients, 63 in single position OLIF (group SO) and 35 in MI-PLIF/TLIF (group P/T). Surgical time, blood loss, mobilization time after surgery and complications were analyzed for all patients. Clinical evaluation included visual analog scale (VAS) for back pain, oswestry disability index (ODI). Radiological parameters included cage height (CH), cage to disc ratio (CDR), DH change, pre and postoperative disc height (DH), foraminal height (FH), foraminal area (FA), segmental lordosis (SL). Results: In group SO (vs group P/T), surgical time, blood loss and mobilization time were 117.7± 34.1 minutes (171.8 ± 40.6 minutes, p<0.000001), 139.2 ± 82.0 ml (vs. 374.2 ± 247.7 ml, p<0.000001) and 2.7 ±1 .0 days (vs 3.9 ± 2.4 days, p<0.000001) respectively. The CH, CDR, DH change and postoperative DH, FH, FA increase were statistically significant in group SO compared to group P/T. VAS and ODI improvement were similar in both groups. Mobilization time is shorter in group SO. Total complication rate in group SO was 7% while that in group P/T was 11%. Conclusions: Simultaneous single position O-arm navigated C-arm free OLIF reduces the surgical time, blood loss, mobilization time after operation without the risk of an adverse event of intraoperative radiation to operating staff. Good indirect decompression can be achieved with this method. Clinical results were similar in both groups.