Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Definition of safe zone in vertebral body in relation to anterior instrumentation

  • Case series
  • Published:
Spine Deformity Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

We set out to determine the “safe zone” for anterior instrumentation in scoliosis surgery assessing the relationship of the great vessels to the spine.

Methods

A total of 34 children undergoing posterior idiopathic scoliosis surgery were included in the study between 2010 and 2016. The preoperative scans were assessed to identify the position of the great vessels relative to the spine from T4 to L4. A coordinate system was specifically designed to determine safe zones for device locations. The safe zone right (SZR) was defined as the angle formed between X-axis (0°) and a line connecting the origin and the edge of the aorta and the safe zone left (SZL), the angle between the edge of the aorta to 180°.

Results

The average age was 14 years, with 30 females (88.2%). Lenke classification, the most common curve was 1BN (20.6%), followed by 1AN, 3C− and 6CN (8.8% each). The Apex was T8 and T9 (29.4 and 23.5% respectively). 58% of the curves were right sided. The mean SZL was from 155.7° to 180° at the T4 level to 104.3°–180° at L4. The mean SZR was from 0 to 110.7° at T4 to 0–76.18° at L4. The side of the curves was correlated at p level with the SZL and SZR. There was a significant correlation in the following levels: from T4 to L2 in the SZL, and from T7 to L2 in the SZR.

Conclusions

Between T4 and T11, the right side of the vertebrae is safe, and from T12 to L4 the safe zones are more lateral and smaller. In a right-sided scoliosis, the danger zone moves more posterolateral at every level. In a left-sided curve, the danger zone is more anteromedial. Knowledge of these safe zones should allow safer placement of anterior devices.

Level of evidence

Level III

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Weinstein SL, Dolan LA, Cheng JC, Danielsson A, Morcuende JA (2008) Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Lancet 371(9623):1527–1537

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Matsuzaki H, Tokuhashi Y, Wakabayashi K, Kitamura S (1993) Penetration of a screw into the thoracic aorta in anterior spinal instrumentation: a case report. Spine 18(15):2327–2331

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Ohnishi T, Neo M, Matsushita M, Komeda M, Koyama T, Nakamura T (2001) Delayed aortic rupture caused by an implanted anterior spinal device: case report. J Neurosurg Spine 95(2):253–256

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Uribe JS, Deukmedjian AR (2015) Visceral, vascular, and wound complications following over 13,000 lateral interbody fusions: a survey study and literature review. Eur Spine J 24(3):386–396

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Szolar DH, Preidler KW, Steiner H, Riepl T, Flaschka G, Stiskal M, Moelleken S, Norman D (1996) Vascular complications in lumbar disk surgery: report of four cases. Neuroradiology 38(6):521–525

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Hicks JM, Singla A, Shen FH, Arlet V (2010) Complications of pedicle screw fixation in scoliosis surgery: a systematic review. Spine 35(11):E465–E470

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Pesenti S, Bartoli MA, Blondel B, Peltier E, Adetchessi T, Fuentes S (2014) Endovascular aortic injury repair after thoracic pedicle screw placement. Orthopaed Traumatol Surg Res 100(5):569–573

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Kakkos SK, Shepard AD (2008) Delayed presentation of aortic injury by pedicle screws: report of two cases and review of the literature. J Vasc Surg 47(5):1074–1082

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Smorgick Y, Millgram MA, Anekstein Y, Floman Y, Mirovsky Y (2005) Accuracy and safety of thoracic pedicle screw placement in spinal deformities. J Spinal Disord Tech 18(6):522–526

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Şarlak AY, Tosun B, Atmaca H, Sarisoy HT, Buluç L (2009) Evaluation of thoracic pedicle screw placement in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Eur Spine J 18(12):1892–1897

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Moore KL (2010) The thoracic and abdominal aorta. In: Moore KL (ed) Clinically oriented anatomy, 6ththd edn. Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore, pp 167–313

    Google Scholar 

  12. Suk SL, Lee SM, Chung ER, Kim JH, Kim SS (2005) Selective thoracic fusion with segmental pedicle screw fixation in the treatment of thoracic idiopathic scoliosis: more than 5-year follow-up. Spine 30(14):1602–1609

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Sucato DJ, Duchene C (2003) The position of the aorta relative to the spine: a comparison of patients with and without idiopathic scoliosis. J Bone Jt Surg Am 85(8):1461–1469

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Qiao J, Zhu F, Xu L, Zhu Z, Qian B, Liu Z, Qiu Y (2012) Comparison of the aorta impingement risks between thoracolumbar/lumbar curves with different convexities in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a computed tomography study. Eur Spine J 21(10):2043–2049

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Milbrandt TA, Sucato DJ (2007) The position of the aorta relative to the spine in patients with left thoracic scoliosis: a comparison with normal patients. Spine 32(12):E348–E353

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Bullmann V, Fallenberg EM, Meier N, Fischbach R, Lerner T, Schulte TL, Osada N, Liljenqvist UR (2006) The position of the aorta relative to the spine before and after anterior instrumentation in right thoracic scoliosis. Spine 31(15):1706–1713

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Takeshita K, Maruyama T, Nakao Y, Ono T, Taniguchi Y, Chikuda H, Higashikawa A, Nakamura K (2010) Aorta movement in patients with scoliosis after posterior surgery. Spine 35(26):E1571–E1576

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Vaccaro AR, Kepler CK, Rihn JA, Suzuki H, Ratliff JK, Harrop JS, Morrison WB, Limthongkul W, Albert TJ (2012) Anatomical relationships of the anterior blood vessels to the lower lumbar intervertebral discs. J Bone Jt Surg 94(12):1088–1094

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Huitema GC, Cornips EM, Castelijns MH et al (2007) The position of the aorta relative to the spine: is it mobile or not? Spine 32(12):1259–1264

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Liu J, Shen J, Zhang J, Li S, Zhao H, Qiu G, Wang Y (2012) The position of the aorta relative to the spine for pedicle screw placement in the correction of idiopathic scoliosis. Clin Spine Surg 25(4):E103–E107

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No funding was received for this work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Paediatric Orthopaedic Service, Hospital Infantil Universitario Niño Jesús, Menéndez Pelayo 65, 28009 JCR, Madrid, Spain

    Rosa M. Egea-Gámez & Rafael González-Díaz

  2. Paediatric Orthopaedic Service, Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre and John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK

    James Wilson-MacDonald & David Murray

Authors
  1. Rosa M. Egea-Gámez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. James Wilson-MacDonald
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. David Murray
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Rafael González-Díaz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Rosa Maria Egea-Gámez, James Wilson-MacDonald, David Murray, and Rafael González-Díaz—substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; final approval of the version to be published; agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rosa M. Egea-Gámez.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval

This study was carried out in accordance with the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki (JBJS 79A:1089-98, 1997). Patients’ confidentiality was protected according to the U.S. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA).

Informed consent

The manuscript includes a statement that the subjects gave informed consent to participate and that the study was approved by an institutional review board or a similar committee in the Nino Jesús Hospital.

Research involving human and animal rights

In this study animals were not necessary.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Egea-Gámez, R.M., Wilson-MacDonald, J., Murray, D. et al. Definition of safe zone in vertebral body in relation to anterior instrumentation. Spine Deform 8, 637–646 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-020-00100-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-020-00100-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation