Accuracy and revision rate of intraoperative computed tomography point-to-point navigation for lateral mass and pedicle screw placement: 11-year single-center experience in 1054 patients
- 32 Downloads
High accuracy in intraoperative computed tomography (iCT) navigation utilizing an intraoperatively acquired dataset for screw placement in the spine has been reported in the literature. To further improve the accuracy and counteract any intraoperative movement of predefined registration points, we introduce an iCT point-to-point navigation, where marker screws are inserted intraoperatively to increase patient safety. In all, 1054 patients who underwent iCT point-to-point navigation for lateral mass and pedicle screw placement were retrospectively analyzed between 09/2005 and 09/2016. Implant-related complications such as screw misplacement, screw loosening, and revision rate were determined. Furthermore, we investigated the rate of complications and the clinical outcome. In total, 6059 screws were inserted in 1054 patients. There were 553 (52.5%) female and 501 (47.5%) male patients. Average age was 63.5 years, mean BMI 27.5 (SD 13.9). Here, 1427 (23.5%) screws were inserted in the cervical, 995 (16.4%) in the thoracic, 3167 (52.3%) in the lumbar, and 470 (7.8%) in the sacral spine. Eight patients required a revision procedure for screw misplacement (0.8%). Total screw misplacement rate was 0.3% (16/6059). With the use of reference markers in iCT-based, spinal, point-to-point navigation, we achieved a high accuracy of screw placement with a low revision rate (0.8%) and a total screw misplacement rate of 0.3%.
KeywordsIntraoperative CT Computer-assisted spinal surgery Point-to-point navigation Spinal instrumentation
The authors of this study would like to thank Sherryl Sundell for language editing and proofreading the manuscript. Special thanks also go to Klaus Zweckberger, Jan Oliver Neumann, Daniel Hertle, Patrick Schiebel, Berk Orakcioglu, Oliver Sakowitz, Daniel Haux, and Martin Volz.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the local ethical committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. This retrospective study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Heidelberg University Medical School (No. S-723/2017).
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- 7.Costa F, Cardia A, Ortolina A, Fabio G, Zerbi A, Fornari M (2011) Spinal navigation: standard preoperative versus intraoperative computed tomography data set acquisition for computer-guidance system: radiological and clinical study in 100 consecutive patients. Spine 36:2094–2098. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e318201129d CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.Dea N, Fisher CG, Batke J, Strelzow J, Mendelsohn D, Paquette SJ, Kwon BK, Boyd MD, Dvorak MF, Street JT (2016) Economic evaluation comparing intraoperative cone beam CT-based navigation and conventional fluoroscopy for the placement of spinal pedicle screws: a patient-level data cost-effectiveness analysis. Spine J 16:23–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2015.09.062 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.Eftekhar B, Ghodsi M, Ketabchi E, Rasaee S (2002) Surgical simulation software for insertion of pedicle screws. Neurosurgery 50:222–223 discussion 223-224Google Scholar
- 11.Fichtner J, Hofmann N, Rienmuller A, Buchmann N, Gempt J, Kirschke JS, Ringel F, Meyer B, Ryang YM (2018) Revision rate of misplaced pedicle screws of the thoracolumbar spine-comparison of three-dimensional fluoroscopy navigation with freehand placement: a systematic analysis and review of the literature. World Neurosurg 109:e24–e32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2017.09.091 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Gautschi OP, Schatlo B, Schaller K, Tessitore E (2011) Clinically relevant complications related to pedicle screw placement in thoracolumbar surgery and their management: a literature review of 35,630 pedicle screws. Neurosurg Focus 31:E8. https://doi.org/10.3171/2011.7.FOCUS11168 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 15.Gelalis ID, Paschos NK, Pakos EE, Politis AN, Arnaoutoglou CM, Karageorgos AC, Ploumis A, Xenakis TA (2012) Accuracy of pedicle screw placement: a systematic review of prospective in vivo studies comparing free hand, fluoroscopy guidance and navigation techniques. Eur Spine J 21:247–255. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-011-2011-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 21.Ishak B, Schneider T, Gimmy V, Unterberg AW, Kiening KL (2017) Early complications, morbidity, and mortality in octogenarians and nonagenarians undergoing posterior intra-operative spinal navigation-based C1/2 fusion for type II odontoid process fractures. J Neurotrauma 34:3326–3335. https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2017.4968 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.Jin M, Liu Z, Liu X, Yan H, Han X, Qiu Y, Zhu Z (2016) Does intraoperative navigation improve the accuracy of pedicle screw placement in the apical region of dystrophic scoliosis secondary to neurofibromatosis type I: comparison between O-arm navigation and free-hand technique. Eur Spine J 25:1729–1737. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-015-4012-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 25.Kosmopoulos V, Schizas C (2007) Pedicle screw placement accuracy: a meta-analysis. Spine 32:E111–E120. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.brs.0000254048.79024.8b CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 28.Liu Z, Jin M, Qiu Y, Yan H, Han X, Zhu Z (2016) The superiority of intraoperative O-arm navigation-assisted surgery in instrumenting extremely small thoracic pedicles of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a case-control study. Medicine 95:e3581. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000003581 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 29.Luciano CJ, Banerjee PP, Bellotte B, Oh GM, Lemole M Jr, Charbel FT, Roitberg B (2011) Learning retention of thoracic pedicle screw placement using a high-resolution augmented reality simulator with haptic feedback. Neurosurgery 69:ons14–ons19; discussion ons19. https://doi.org/10.1227/NEU.0b013e31821954ed Google Scholar
- 31.Mirza SK, Wiggins GC, Ct K, York JE, Bellabarba C, Knonodi MA, Chapman JR, Shaffrey CI (2003) Accuracy of thoracic vertebral body screw placement using standard fluoroscopy, fluoroscopic image guidance, and computed tomographic image guidance: a cadaver study. Spine 28:402–413. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.BRS.0000048461.51308.CD Google Scholar
- 33.Nooh A, Lubov J, Aoude A, Aldebeyan S, Jarzem P, Ouellet J, Weber MH (2017) Differences between manufacturers of computed tomography-based computer-assisted surgery systems do exist: a systematic literature review. Global Spine J 7:83–94. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0036-1583942 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 36.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 32:E56–E64. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.brs.0000252094.64857.ab CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 37.Roy-Camille R, Saillant G, Mazel C (1986) Internal fixation of the lumbar spine with pedicle screw plating. Clin Orthop 203:7–17Google Scholar
- 39.Samdani AF, Ranade A, Sciubba DM, Cahill PJ, Antonacci MD, Clements DH, Betz RR (2010) Accuracy of free-hand placement of thoracic pedicle screws in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: how much of a difference does surgeon experience make? Eur Spine J 19:91–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-009-1183-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 40.Scheufler KM, Franke J, Eckardt A, Dohmen H (2011) Accuracy of image-guided pedicle screw placement using intraoperative computed tomography-based navigation with automated referencing, part I: cervicothoracic spine. Neurosurgery 69:782–795; discussion 795. https://doi.org/10.1227/NEU.0b013e318222ae16 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 45.Tormenti MJ, Kostov DB, Gardner PA, Kanter AS, Spiro RM, Okonkwo DO (2010) Intraoperative computed tomography image-guided navigation for posterior thoracolumbar spinal instrumentation in spinal deformity surgery. Neurosurg Focus 28:E11. https://doi.org/10.3171/2010.1.FOCUS09275 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 46.Uhl E, Zausinger S, Morhard D, Heigl T, Scheder B, Rachinger W, Schichor C, Tonn JC (2009) Intraoperative computed tomography with integrated navigation system in a multidisciplinary operating suite. Neurosurgery 64:231–239; discussion 239-240. https://doi.org/10.1227/01.NEU.0000340785.51492.B5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 47.Villard J, Ryang YM, Demetriades AK, Reinke A, Behr M, Preuss A, Meyer B, Ringel F (2014) Radiation exposure to the surgeon and the patient during posterior lumbar spinal instrumentation: a prospective randomized comparison of navigated versus non-navigated freehand techniques. Spine 39:1004–1009. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000000351 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 49.Waschke A, Walter J, Duenisch P, Reichart R, Kalff R, Ewald C (2013) CT-navigation versus fluoroscopy-guided placement of pedicle screws at the thoracolumbar spine: single center experience of 4,500 screws. Eur Spine J 22:654–660. 660. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-012-2509-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar