Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Accuracy of various fluoroscopic landmarks for determination of midline implant placement within the cervical disc space

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

Abstract

Purpose

The traditional teaching has been that proper function of a cervical disc replacement is dependent upon appropriate placement, which includes centering the device in the coronal plane. The purpose of this study was to identify the most reliable anatomical landmark for determining midline placement of an implant within the cervical disc space under fluoroscopy.

Methods

Digital fluoroscopy images were taken for each cervical level at 0 °, 2.5 °, 5 °, 7.5 °, 10 °, and 15 ° from the mid-axis by rotating the C-arm beam of six cadavers. Thin-slice CT scanning of the same levels was subsequently performed. Three independent reviewers measured the distance between anatomic structures: (a) tip of the right uncinate; (b) medial border of the right pedicle; and (c) center of the spinous processes for different x-ray angles across cervical levels C3–7.

Results

Both the uncinate and pedicle demonstrated superior overall accuracy to that of the spinous process (p ≤ 0.02) at all angles except at 0 ° for the pedicle where the difference was not statistically significant. Overall (pooled C3–7), the accuracy of the uncinate did not differ significantly from that of the pedicle at any fluoroscopic angle. The center of the spinous process measurement was particularly sensitive to deviations from the perfect anteroposterior fluoroscopy image.

Conclusions

The results of this investigation suggest that the tip of the uncinate and the medial border of the pedicle are more accurate measures of midline in the cervical spine than the center of the spinous process and are less susceptible to inadvertent off-axis imaging.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kerezoudis P, Alvi MA, Goyal A, Ubl DS, Meyer J, Habermann EB, Currier BL, Bydon M (2018) Commentary: utilization trends of cervical disk replacement in the United States. Oper Neurosurg Hagerstown 15:40–43. https://doi.org/10.1093/ons/opy181

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Wang QL, Tu ZM, Hu P, Kontos F, Li YW, Li L, Dai YL, Lv GH, Wang B (2020) Long-term results comparing cervical disc arthroplasty to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Orthop Surg 12:16–30. https://doi.org/10.1111/os.12585

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Finn MA, Boylan A, Anderson PA (2016) Chapter 7: Cervical disc replacement. In: Rhee JM, Boden SD, Weisel SW (eds) In: Operative techniques in spine surgery. Wolters Kluwer, Netherlands, pp 60–72

    Google Scholar 

  4. McAfee PC, Cunningham B, Holsapple G, Adams K, Blumenthal S, Guyer RD, Dmietriev A, Maxwell JH, Regan JJ (1976) A prospective, randomized, multicenter Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption study of lumbar total disc replacement with the CHARITE artificial disc versus lumbar fusion: part II: evaluation of radiographic outcomes and correlation of surgical technique accuracy with clinical outcome. Spine Phila Pa 1976 30:1576–1583 (discussion E1388–1590)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Han KS, Kim K, Park WM, Lim DS, Kim YH (2013) Effect of centers of rotation on spinal loads and muscle forces in total disk replacement of lumbar spine. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 227:543–550. https://doi.org/10.1177/0954411912474742

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Rohlmann A, Lauterborn S, Dreischarf M, Schmidt H, Putzier M, Strube P, Zander T (2013) Parameters influencing the outcome after total disc replacement at the lumbosacral junction. part 1: misalignment of the vertebrae adjacent to a total disc replacement affects the facet joint and facet capsule forces in a probabilistic finite element analysis. Eur Spine J 22:2271–2278. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-013-2909-z

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Strube P, Hoff EK, Schurings M, Schmidt H, Dreischarf M, Rohlmann A, Putzier M (2013) Parameters influencing the outcome after total disc replacement at the lumbosacral junction. part 2: distraction and posterior translation lead to clinical failure after a mean follow-up of 5 years. Eur Spine J 22:2279–2287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-013-2967-2

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Zigler JE, Delamarter RB (2012) Five-year results of the prospective, randomized, multicenter, food and drug administration investigational device exemption study of the prodisc-L total disc replacement versus circumferential arthrodesis for the treatment of single-level degenerative disc disease. J Neurosurg Spine 17:493–501. https://doi.org/10.3171/2012.9.SPINE11498

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Mikhael M, Brooks JT, Akpolat YT, Cheng WK (2017) Rotation effect and anatomic landmark accuracy for midline placement of lumbar artificial disc under fluoroscopy. Eur Spine J 26:794–798. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-015-3990-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Wagner SC, Formby PM, Kang DG, Van Blarcum GS, Cody JP, Tracey RW, Lehman RA Jr (2016) Persistent axial neck pain after cervical disc arthroplasty: a radiographic analysis. Spine J 16:851–856. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2016.02.043

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Aronson N, Filtzer DL, Bagan M (1968) Anterior cervical fusion by the smith-robinson approach. J Neurosurg 29:396–404

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Guyer RD, Voronov LI, Havey RM, Khayatzadeh S, Carandang G, Blank KR, Werner S, Rubin J, Padovani N, Patwardhan AG (2018) Kinematic assessment of an elastic-core cervical disc prosthesis in one and two-level constructs. JOR Spine 1:e1040. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsp2.1040

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Rihn JA, Radcliff K, Hipp J, Vaccaro AR, Hilibrand AS, Anderson DG, Albert TJ (2015) Radiographic variables that may predict clinical outcomes in cervical disk replacement surgery. J Spinal Disord Tech 28:106–113. https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0b013e31826a0c84

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Texas Back Institute, 6020 West Parker Road, Plano, TX, 75093, USA

    Peter B. Derman & Ram Haddas

  2. Orthofix Medical, Inc, Lewisville, TX, USA

    Erik Waldorff & Nianli Zhang

Authors
  1. Peter B. Derman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Erik Waldorff
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nianli Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ram Haddas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ram Haddas.

Ethics declarations

Compliance with ethical standards

I have no potential conflict of interest.

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

Derman, P.B., Waldorff, E., Zhang, N. et al. Accuracy of various fluoroscopic landmarks for determination of midline implant placement within the cervical disc space. Eur Spine J 30, 554–559 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-020-06638-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-020-06638-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation