Abstract
3D navigation options offer new opportunities for more precise navigation in spinal surgery, favor reduction of radiation exposure for the surgical team, and accelerate surgical workflow. Recently, the latest concept of “total navigation” using iCT NAV in spinal surgery has been introduced. Therefore, workflows have changed from what they were before using X-ray and fluoroscopy. Although several groups have described reduced radiation exposure for the surgical staff, fastest surgical workflows, and improved screw implantation accuracy, there is not enough evidence available to prove a significant benefit over the institutional costs.
Total navigation makes spine surgery safer and more accurate and enhances efficient and reproducible workflows. Fluoroscopy and radiation exposure for the surgical staff can be eliminated in the majority of cases.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Malhotra D, et al. Instrumentation of the posterior thoracolumbar spine: from wires to pedicle screws. Neurosurgery. 2014;10(Suppl 4):497–504; discussion 505
Kalfas IH. Image-guided spinal navigation: principles and clinical applications. In: Ozgur B, Benzel E, Garfin S, editors. Minimally invasive spine surgery: a practical guide to anatomy and techniques. New York, NY: Springer; 2009. p. 7–22.
Kalfas IH. Image-guided spinal navigation: principles and clinical applications. In: Ozgur B, Benzel E, Garfin S, editors. Minimally invasive spine surgery: a practical guide to anatomy and techniques. 1st ed. New York: Springer; 2012.
Kalfas IH. Image-guided spinal navigation: application to spinal metastases. Neurosurg Focus. 2001;11(6):e5.
Härtl R, Korge A. Minimally invasive spine surgery: techniques, evidence,e and controversies. New York: Thieme; 2012.
Mezger U, Jendrewski C, Bartels M. Navigation in surgery. Langenbeck's Arch Surg. 2013;398(4):501–14.
Holly LT. Image-guided spinal surgery. Int J Med Robot. 2006;2(1):7–15.
Sanders R, et al. Exposure of the orthopaedic surgeon to radiation. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1993;75(3):326–30.
Rampersaud YR, et al. Radiation exposure to the spine surgeon during fluoroscopically assisted pedicle screw insertion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000;25(20):2637–45.
Kalfas IH, et al. Application of frameless stereotaxy to pedicle screw fixation of the spine. J Neurosurg. 1995;83(4):641–7.
Murphy MA, et al. Frameless stereotaxis for the insertion of lumbar pedicle screws. J Clin Neurosci. 1994;1(4):257–60.
Allam Y, et al. Computer tomography assessment of pedicle screw placement in thoracic spine: comparison between free hand and a generic 3D-based navigation techniques. Eur Spine J. 2013;22(3):648–53.
Tian NF, et al. Pedicle screw insertion accuracy with different assisted methods: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies. Eur Spine J. 2011;20(6):846–59.
Rivkin MA, Yocom SS. Thoracolumbar instrumentation with CT-guided navigation (O-arm) in 270 consecutive patients: accuracy rates and lessons learned. Neurosurg Focus. 2014;36(3):E7.
Aoude AA, et al. Methods to determine pedicle screw placement accuracy in spine surgery: a systematic review. Eur Spine J. 2015;24(5):990–1004.
Kotani Y, et al. Accuracy analysis of pedicle screw placement in posterior scoliosis surgery: comparison between conventional fluoroscopic and computer-assisted technique. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007;32(14):1543–50.
Laine T, et al. Accuracy of pedicle screw insertion with and without computer assistance: a randomised controlled clinical study in 100 consecutive patients. Eur Spine J. 2000;9(3):235–40.
Navarro-Ramirez R, et al. Total navigation in spine surgery; a concise guide to eliminate fluoroscopy using a portable intraoperative-CT 3D navigation system. World Neurosurg. 2017;100:325.
Gelalis ID, et al. Accuracy of pedicle screw placement: a systematic review of prospective in vivo studies comparing free hand, fluoroscopy guidance and navigation techniques. Eur Spine J. 2012;21(2):247–55.
Shin BJ, et al. Pedicle screw navigation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of perforation risk for computer-navigated versus freehand insertion. J Neurosurg Spine. 2012;17(2):113–22.
Van de Kelft E, et al. A prospective multicenter registry on the accuracy of pedicle screw placement in the thoracic, lumbar, and sacral levels with the use of the O-arm imaging system and StealthStation Navigation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2012;37(25):E1580–7.
Scheufler KM, et al. Accuracy of image-guided pedicle screw placement using intraoperative computed tomography-based navigation with automated referencing. Part II: thoracolumbar spine. Neurosurgery. 2011;69(6):1307–16.
Santos ER, et al. Comparison of open and percutaneous lumbar pedicle screw revision rate using 3-D image guidance and intraoperative CT. Orthopedics. 2015;38(2):e129–34.
Technologists, A.S.o.R. X-ray risk calculator. 2016 [cited 2017 03302017]; Available from: http://www.xrayrisk.com/calculator/calculator-normal-studies.php?id=26.
Nolte LP, et al. Computer-aided fixation of spinal implants. J Image Guid Surg. 1995;1(2):88–93.
Karhade AV, Vasudeva VS, Pompeu YA, Lu Y. Image guided spine surgery: available technology and future potential. Austin Neurosurg Open Access. 2016;3(1):1043.
Brodwater BK, et al. Extracranial application of the frameless stereotactic operating microscope: experience with lumbar spine. Neurosurgery. 1993;32(2):209–13; discussion 213
Nolte L, et al. Image-guided computer-assisted spine surgery: a pilot study on pedicle screw fixation. Stereotact Funct Neurosurg. 1996;66(1–3):108–17.
Foley KT, Smith MM. Image-guided spine surgery. Neurosurg Clin N Am. 1996;7(2):171–86.
Wood MJ, McMillen J. The surgical learning curve and accuracy of minimally invasive lumbar pedicle screw placement using CT based computer-assisted navigation plus continuous electromyography monitoring – a retrospective review of 627 screws in 150 patients. Int J Spine Surg. 2014;8
Larson AN, et al. The accuracy of navigation and 3D image-guided placement for the placement of pedicle screws in congenital spine deformity. J Pediatr Orthop. 2012;32(6):e23–9.
Patel AA, Whang PG, Vaccaro AR. Overview of computer-assisted image-guided surgery of the spine. Semin Spine Surg. 2008;20(3):186–94.
Ringel F, et al. Navigation, robotics, and intraoperative imaging in spinal surgery. In: Schramm J, editor. Advances and technical standards in neurosurgery: volume 41. Cham: Springer; 2014. p. 3–22.
Acosta FL Jr, et al. Use of intraoperative isocentric C-arm 3D fluoroscopy for sextant percutaneous pedicle screw placement: case report and review of the literature. Spine J. 2005;5(3):339–43.
Hedrick MH, Fraser JK. Processing regenerative cells from adipose tissue for placement in patient suffering from e.g. liver disorder involves separating, concentrating, and manipulating regenerative cells for enhancement of therapeutic effects. San Diego, California: Cytori Therapeutics Inc; 2008.
Hahn P, et al. A new electromagnetic navigation system for pedicle screws placement: a human cadaver study at the lumbar spine. PLoS One. 2015;10(7):e0133708.
Papadopoulos EC, et al. Accuracy of single-time, multilevel registration in image-guided spinal surgery. Spine J. 2005;5(3):263–7.
Kalfas IH. Benzel’s Spine Surgery - 193 Intraoperative Imaging of the Spine. 4th ed. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier; 2017.
Njoku I, et al. Minimally invasive 2D navigation-assisted treatment of thoracolumbar spinal fractures in East Africa: a case report. Cureus. 2016;8(2):e507.
Holly LT, Foley KT. Three-dimensional fluoroscopy-guided percutaneous thoracolumbar pedicle screw placement. Technical note. J Neurosurg. 2003;99(3. Suppl):324–9.
Scarfe WC, Farman AG. What is cone-beam CT and how does it work? Dent Clin N Am. 2008;52(4):707–30.
Schafer S, et al. Mobile C-arm cone-beam CT for guidance of spine surgery: image quality, radiation dose, and integration with interventional guidance. Med Phys. 2011;38(8):4563–74.
Nottmeier EW. A review of image-guided spinal surgery. J Neurosurg Sci. 2012;56(1):35–47.
Tjardes T, et al. Image-guided spine surgery: state of the art and future directions. Eur Spine J. 2010;19(1):25–45.
Baaj AA, Beckman J, Smith DA. O-Arm-based image guidance in minimally invasive spine surgery: technical note. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2013;115(3):342–5.
Mendelsohn D, et al. Patient and surgeon radiation exposure during spinal instrumentation using intraoperative computed tomography-based navigation. Spine J. 2016;16(3):343–54.
Lee MH, et al. Feasibility of intra-operative computed tomography navigation system for pedicle screw insertion of the thoraco-lumbar spine. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2013;26(5):E183–7.
Houten JK, Nasser R, Baxi N. Clinical assessment of percutaneous lumbar pedicle screw placement using the O-arm multidimensional surgical imaging system. Neurosurgery. 2012;70(4):990–5.
Slomczykowski M, et al. Radiation dose for pedicle screw insertion. Fluoroscopic method versus computer-assisted surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1999;24(10):975–82; discussion 983
Hartl R, et al. Worldwide survey on the use of navigation in spine surgery. World Neurosurg. 2013;79(1):162–72.
Khanna AR, Yanamadala V, Coumans JV. Effect of intraoperative navigation on operative time in 1-level lumbar fusion surgery. J Clin Neurosci. 2016;32:72–6.
Meng XT, et al. Computer navigation versus fluoroscopy-guided navigation for thoracic pedicle screw placement: a meta-analysis. Neurosurg Rev. 2016;39(3):385–91.
Shin BJ, et al. Navigated guide tube for the placement of mini-open pedicle screws using stereotactic 3D navigation without the use of K-wires: technical note. J Neurosurg Spine. 2013;18(2):178–83.
Joseph JR, et al. Use of 3D CT-based navigation in minimally invasive lateral lumbar interbody fusion. J Neurosurg Spine. 2016;25(3):339–44.
Lian X, et al. Total 3D Airo(R) navigation for minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Biomed Res Int. 2016;2016:5027340.
Wang Y, et al. Navigated 2-level posterior lumbar fusion: a 5-cm-incision procedure. J Orthop Surg Res. 2016;11:1.
Kim TT, et al. Minimally invasive spinal surgery with intraoperative image-guided navigation. Biomed Res Int. 2016;2016:5716235.
Nasser R, et al. Resection of spinal column tumors utilizing image-guided navigation: a multicenter analysis. Neurosurg Focus. 2016;41(2):E15.
Yang YK, et al. Computer navigation-aided resection of sacral chordomas. Chin Med J. 2016;129(2):162–8.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendices
Quiz Questions
-
1.
What intraoperative imaging technologies are available? Mention at least four.
-
2.
What method is still the most reliable and cost-effective?
-
3.
Mention two limitations of the state-of-the-art technologies (iCT).
-
4.
Mention the critical steps for a successful spine navigation case.
Answers
-
1.
Conventional X-rays Fluoroscopy Intraoperative cone beam CT scanner (e.g., O-arm) Intraoperative fan beam CT (e.g., Airo)
-
2.
Fluoroscopy
-
3.
Costs/benefit Has not shown a significant improvement on clinical and/or radiological outcomes compared with conventional methods (fluoroscopy)
-
4.
Localization Confirmation using anatomical landmarks If shifting is suspected, accuracy must be re-tested using anatomical landmarks Spinal navigation does not substitute mastering the anatomy
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Luís, A., Navarro-Ramirez, R., Kirnaz, S., Nakhla, J., Härtl, R. (2019). Navigated Spinal Fusion. In: Phillips, F., Lieberman, I., Polly Jr., D., Wang, M. (eds) Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19007-1_31
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19007-1_31
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-19006-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-19007-1
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)