Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Clinical evaluation of the polymethylmethacrylate-augmented thoracic and lumbar pedicle screw fixation guided by the three-dimensional navigation for the osteoporosis patients

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Spine Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of three-dimensional (3D) navigation-guided polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA)-augmented thoracic and lumbar pedicle screw fixation for the osteoporotic patients.

Methods

27 consecutive osteoporosis patients with a variety of spinal disorders who underwent 3D navigation-guided PMMA-augmented pedicle screw fixation were evaluated clinically and radiologically in the perioperative and 1-year follow-up period. The improvement of Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores was analyzed. PMMA leakage and other complications were inspected intraoperatively and postoperatively. Screw loosening and bone fusion were evaluated radiographically during follow-up.

Results

8 patients had thoracic and lumbar fractures; 18 patients had degenerative spinal disorders; one patient had revision surgery. One patient died of postoperative pneumonia. Each of the other 26 patients was followed up regularly at 3, 6, 12 and 18 months postoperatively. The mean therapeutic improvement rate is 39.6 % evaluated by JOA scores. 2 patients (7.4 %) had leakage into the spinal canal in front of the posterior longitudinal ligament and two patients (7.4 %) had leakage into the prevertebral soft tissue inspected by the postoperative CT scans. No pedicle cortex breach and cement leakage surrounding pedicle cortex were observed. None of patients complained of dyspnoea and showed evidence of pulmonary embolism. Bone fusions were found in 20 patients (bony fusion rate 76.9 %) at the 12-month follow-up and no screw loosening occurs.

Conclusion

The results show favorable outcome using 3D navigation-guided PMMA-augmented thoracic and lumbar pedicle screw fixation for the osteoporosis patients both clinically and radiologically.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Cummings SR, Melton LJ (2002) Epidemiology and outcomes of osteoporotic fractures. Lancet 359(9319):1761–1767

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Paxinos O, Tsitsopoulos PP, Zindrick MR, Voronov LI et al (2010) Evaluation of pullout strength and failure mechanism of posterior instrumentation in normal and osteopenic thoracic vertebrae. J Neurosurg Spine 13(4):469–476

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Halvorson TL, Kelley LA, Thomas KA, Whitecloud TS 3rd, Cook SD (1994) Effects of bone mineral density on pedicle screw fixation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 19(21):2415–2420

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Garfin SR, Yuan HA, Reiley MA (2001) New technologies in spine: kyphoplasty and vertebroplasty for the treatment of painful osteoporotic compression fractures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 26(14):1511–1515

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Frankel BM, Jones T, Wang C (2007) Segmental polymethylmethacrylate-augmented pedicle screw fixation in patients with bone softening caused by osteoporosis and metastatic tumor involvement: a clinical evaluation. Neurosurgery 61(3):531–537 (discussion 537–538)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Fuentes S, Blondel B, Metellus P, Gaudart J, Adetchessi T, Dufour H (2010) Percutaneous kyphoplasty and pedicle screw fixation for the management of thoraco-lumbar burst fractures. Eur Spine J 19(8):1281–1287

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Becker S, Chavanne A, Spitaler R, Kropik K et al (2008) Assessment of different screw augmentation techniques and screw designs in osteoporotic spines. Eur Spine J 17(11):1462–1469

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Gao M, Lei W, Wu Z, Liu D, Shi L (2011) Biomechanical evaluation of fixation strength of conventional and expansive pedicle screws with or without calcium based cement augmentation. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 26(3):238–244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Waits C, Burton D, McIff T (2009) Cement augmentation of pedicle screw fixation using novel cannulated cement insertion device. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 34(14):E478–E483

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Ren H, Shen Y, Zhang YZ, Ding WY et al (2010) Correlative factor analysis on the complications resulting from cement leakage after percutaneous kyphoplasty in the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture. J Spinal Disord Tech 23(7):e9–e15

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Wilkes RA, Mackinnon JG, Thomas WG (1994) Neurological deterioration after cement injection into a vertebral body. J Bone Joint Surg Br 76(1):155

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Rajan VV, Kamath V, Shetty AP, Rajasekaran S (2010) Iso-C3D navigation assisted pedicle screw placement in deformities of the cervical and thoracic spine. Indian J Orthop 44 (2):163–168

    Google Scholar 

  13. Kosmopoulos V, Schizas C (2007) Pedicle screw placement accuracy: a meta-analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 32(3):E111–E120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Engelke K, Adams JE, Armbrecht G, Augat P et al (2008) Clinical use of quantitative computed tomography and peripheral quantitative computed tomography in the management of osteoporosis in adults: the 2007 ISCD official positions. J Clin Densitom 11(1):123–162

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Sawakami K, Yamazaki A, Ishikawa S, Ito T, Watanabe K, Endo N (2012) Polymethylmethacrylate augmentation of pedicle screws increases the initial fixation in osteoporotic spine patients. J Spinal Disord Tech 25(2):E28–E35

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Gaines RW Jr (2000) The use of pedicle-screw internal fixation for the operative treatment of spinal disorders. J Bone Joint Surg Am 82-A(10):1458–1476

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lane NE (2006) Epidemiology, etiology, and diagnosis of osteoporosis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 194(2 Suppl):S3–S11

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Sarzier JS, Evans AJ, Cahill DW (2002) Increased pedicle screw pullout strength with vertebroplasty augmentation in osteoporotic spines. J Neurosurg 96(3 Suppl):309–312

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Wittenberg RH, Lee KS, Shea M, White AA 3rd, Hayes WC (1993) Effect of screw diameter, insertion technique, and bone cement augmentation of pedicular screw fixation strength. Clin Orthop Relat Res 296:278–287

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Frankel BM, Jones T, Wang C (2007) Segmental polymethylmethacrylate-augmented pedicle screw fixation in patients with bone softening caused by osteoporosis and metastatic tumor involvement: a clinical evaluation. Neurosurgery 61(3):531–537 (discussion 537–538)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Chang MC, Liu CL, Chen TH (2008) Polymethylmethacrylate augmentation of pedicle screw for osteoporotic spinal surgery: a novel technique. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 33(10):E317–E324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Rajasekaran S, Vidyadhara S, Ramesh P, Shetty AP (2007) Randomized clinical study to compare the accuracy of navigated and non-navigated thoracic pedicle screws in deformity correction surgeries. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 32(2):E56–E64

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Hulme PA, Krebs J, Ferguson SJ, Berlemann U (2006) Vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty: a systematic review of 69 clinical studies. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 31(17):1983–2001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Merloz P, Troccaz J, Vouaillat H, Vasile C et al (2007) Fluoroscopy-based navigation system in spine surgery. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 221(7):813–820

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Chen LH, Tai CL, Lee DM, Lai PL et al (2011) Pullout strength of pedicle screws with cement augmentation in severe osteoporosis: a comparative study between cannulated screws with cement injection and solid screws with cement pre-filling. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 12:33

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

None of the authors has any potential conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Spine Surgery, Beijing Jishuitan Hospital, Peking University Fourth Clinical Medical College, 31 Xinjiekou East Street, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100035, China

    Qiang Yuan, Guilin Zhang, Jingye Wu, Yonggang Xing, Yuqing Sun & Wei Tian

Authors
  1. Qiang Yuan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Guilin Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jingye Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yonggang Xing
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yuqing Sun
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Wei Tian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wei Tian.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Yuan, Q., Zhang, G., Wu, J. et al. Clinical evaluation of the polymethylmethacrylate-augmented thoracic and lumbar pedicle screw fixation guided by the three-dimensional navigation for the osteoporosis patients. Eur Spine J 24, 1043–1050 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-013-3131-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-013-3131-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation