Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Subaxial cervical pedicle screw insertion with newly defined entry point and trajectory: accuracy evaluation in cadavers

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

Abstract

Successful placement of cervical pedicle screws requires accurate identification of both entry point and trajectory. However, literature has not provided consistent recommendations regarding the direction of pedicle screw insertion and entry point location. The objective of this study was to define a guideline regarding the optimal entry point and trajectory in placing subaxial cervical pedicle screws and to evaluate the screw accuracy in cadaver cervical spines. The guideline for entry point and trajectory for each vertebra was established based on the recently published morphometric data. Six fresh frozen cervical spines (C3–C7) were used. There were two men and four women. After posterior exposure, the entry point was determined and the cortical bone of the entry point was removed using a 2-mm burr. Pilot holes were created with a cervical probe based on the guideline using fluoroscopy. After tapping, 3.5-mm screws with appropriate length were inserted. After screw insertion, every vertebra was dissected and inspected for pedicle breach. The pedicle width, height, pedicle transverse angulation and actual screw insertion angle were measured. A total of 60 pedicle screws were inserted. No statistical difference in pedicle width and height was found between the left and right sides for each level. The overall accuracy of pedicle screws was 83.3%. The remaining 13.3% screws had noncritical breach, and 3.3% had critical breach. The critical breach was not caused by the guideline. There was no statistical difference between the pedicle transverse angulation and the actual screw trajectory created using the guideline. There was statistical difference in pedicle width between the breach and non-breach screws. In conclusion, high success rate of subaxial cervical pedicle screw placement can be achieved using the recently proposed operative guideline and oblique views of fluoroscopy. However, careful preoperative planning and good surgical skills are still required to ensure screw placement accuracy and to reduce the risk of neural and vascular injury.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Abumi K, Itoh H, Taneichi H et al (1994) Transpedicular screw fixation for traumatic lesions of the middle and lower cervical spine: description of the techniques and preliminary report. J Spinal Disord 7:19–28

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Abumi K, Kaneda K (1997) Pedicle screw fixation for nontraumatic lesions of the cervical spine. Spine 22:1853–1863

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Abumi K, Kaneda K, Shono Y et al (1999) One-stage posterior decompression and reconstruction of the cervical spine by using pedicle screw fixation systems. J Neurosurg 90:19–26

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Abumi K, Shono Y, Ito M et al (2000) Complications of pedicle screw fixation in reconstructive surgery of the cervical spine. Spine 25:962–969

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Abumi K, Takada T, Shono Y et al (1999) Posterior occipitocervical reconstruction using cervical pedicle screws and plate–rod systems. Spine 24:1425–1434

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Albert TJ, Klein GR, Joffe D et al (1998) Use of cervicothoracic junction pedicle screws for reconstruction of complex cervical spine pathology. Spine 23:1596–1599

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Hacker AG, Molloy S, Bernard J (2008) The contralateral lamina: a reliable guide in subaxial, cervical pedicle screw placement. Eur Spine J 17:1457–1461

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hardy RW Jr (1995) The posterior surgical approach to the cervical spine. Neuroimaging Clin N Am 5:481–490

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hasegawa K, Hirano T, Shimoda H et al (2008) Indications for cervical pedicle screw instrumentation in nontraumatic lesions. Spine 33:2284–2289

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Jeanneret B, Gebhard JS, Magerl F (1994) Transpedicular screw fixation of articular mass fracture-separation: results of an anatomical study and operative technique. J Spinal Disord 7:222–229

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Johnston TL, Karaikovic EE, Lautenschlager EP et al (2006) Cervical pedicle screws vs. lateral mass screws: uniplanar fatigue analysis and residual pullout strengths. Spine J 6:667–672

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Jones EL, Heller JG, Silcox DH et al (1997) Cervical pedicle screws versus lateral mass screws. Anatomic feasibility and biomechanical comparison. Spine 22:977–982

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Karaikovic EE, Kunakornsawat S, Daubs MD et al (2000) Surgical anatomy of the cervical pedicles: landmarks for posterior cervical pedicle entrance localization. J Spinal Disord 13:63–72

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Karaikovic EE, Yingsakmongkol W, Gaines RW Jr (2001) Accuracy of cervical pedicle screw placement using the funnel technique. Spine 26:2456–2462

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Kothe R, Ruther W, Schneider E et al (2004) Biomechanical analysis of transpedicular screw fixation in the subaxial cervical spine. Spine 29:1869–1875

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Ludwig SC, Kowalski JM, Edwards CC 2nd et al (2000) Cervical pedicle screws: comparative accuracy of two insertion techniques. Spine 25:2675–2681

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ludwig SC, Kramer DL, Balderston RA et al (2000) Placement of pedicle screws in the human cadaveric cervical spine: comparative accuracy of three techniques. Spine 25:1655–1667

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Miller RM, Ebraheim NA, Xu R et al (1996) Anatomic consideration of transpedicular screw placement in the cervical spine. An analysis of two approaches. Spine 21:2317–2322

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Panjabi MM, Duranceau J, Goel V et al (1991) Cervical human vertebrae. Quantitative three-dimensional anatomy of the middle and lower regions. Spine 16:861–869

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Rao RD, Marawar SV, Stemper BD et al (2008) Computerized tomographic morphometric analysis of subaxial cervical spine pedicles in young asymptomatic volunteers. J Bone Joint Surg Am 90:1914–1921

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Reinhold M, Magerl F, Rieger M et al (2007) Cervical pedicle screw placement: feasibility and accuracy of two new insertion techniques based on morphometric data. Eur Spine J 16:47–56

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Richter M, Amiot LP, Neller S et al (2000) Computer-assisted surgery in posterior instrumentation of the cervical spine: an in vitro feasibility study. Eur Spine J 9(Suppl 1):S65–S70

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Richter M, Cakir B, Schmidt R (2005) Cervical pedicle screws: conventional versus computer-assisted placement of cannulated screws. Spine 30:2280–2287

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Richter M, Mattes T, Cakir B (2004) Computer-assisted posterior instrumentation of the cervical and cervico-thoracic spine. Eur Spine J 13:50–59

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Sakamoto T, Neo M, Nakamura T (2004) Transpedicular screw placement evaluated by axial computed tomography of the cervical pedicle. Spine 29:2510–2514 discussion 2515

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Schmidt R, Wilke HJ, Claes L et al (2003) Pedicle screws enhance primary stability in multilevel cervical corpectomies: biomechanical in vitro comparison of different implants including constrained and nonconstrained posterior instumentations. Spine 28:1821–1828

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Stemper BD, Marawar SV, Yoganandan N et al (2008) Quantitative anatomy of subaxial cervical lateral mass: an analysis of safe screw lengths for Roy–Camille and Magerl techniques. Spine 33:893–897

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Foundation for the Advancement of Spine Knowledge, 913 E 26th St, Piper Building, Suite 600, Minneapolis, MN, 55404, USA

    Xiujun Zheng & Chunhui Wu

  2. Twin Cities Spine Center, 913 E 26th St, Piper Building, Suite 600, Minneapolis, MN, 55404, USA

    Xiujun Zheng, Rahul Chaudhari, Amir A. Mehbod & Ensor E. Transfeldt

Authors
  1. Xiujun Zheng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rahul Chaudhari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Chunhui Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Amir A. Mehbod
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ensor E. Transfeldt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Xiujun Zheng.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Zheng, X., Chaudhari, R., Wu, C. et al. Subaxial cervical pedicle screw insertion with newly defined entry point and trajectory: accuracy evaluation in cadavers. Eur Spine J 19, 105–112 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-009-1213-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-009-1213-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation