Facet Violation With Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Placement: Impact of 3D Navigation and Facet Orientation.

Ting Cong, Ahilan Sivaganesan, Christopher M Mikhail, Avani S Vaishnav, James Dowdell, Joseph Barbera, Hiroshi Kumagai, Jonathan Markowitz, Evan Sheha, Sheeraz A Qureshi
{"title":"Facet Violation With Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Placement: Impact of 3D Navigation and Facet Orientation.","authors":"Ting Cong,&nbsp;Ahilan Sivaganesan,&nbsp;Christopher M Mikhail,&nbsp;Avani S Vaishnav,&nbsp;James Dowdell,&nbsp;Joseph Barbera,&nbsp;Hiroshi Kumagai,&nbsp;Jonathan Markowitz,&nbsp;Evan Sheha,&nbsp;Sheeraz A Qureshi","doi":"10.1177/15563316211026324","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><i>Background:</i> The gold standard for percutaneous pedicle screw placement is 2-dimensional (2D) fluoroscopy. Data are sparse on the accuracy of 3-dimensional (3D) navigation percutaneous screw placement in minimally invasive spine procedures. <i>Objective</i>: We sought to compare a single surgeon's percutaneous pedicle screw placement accuracy using 2D fluoroscopy versus 3D navigation, as well as to investigate the effect of facet orientation on facet violation when using 2D fluoroscopy. <i>Methods</i>: We conducted a retrospective radiographic study of consecutive cohort of patients who underwent percutaneous lumbar instrumentation using either 2D fluoroscopy or 3D navigation. All procedures were performed by a single surgeon at 2 academic institutions between 2011 and 2018. Radiographic measurement of screw accuracy was assessed using a postoperative computed tomographic scan. The primary outcome was facet violation, and secondary outcomes were endplate/tip breaches, the Gertzbein-Robbins classification for cortical breaches, and the Simplified Screw Accuracy grade. Statistical comparisons were made between screws placed using 2D fluoroscopy versus 3D navigation. Axial facet angles were also measured to correlate with facet violation rates. <i>Results</i>: In the 138 patients included, 376 screws were placed with fluoroscopy and 193 with navigation. Superior (unfused) level facet violation was higher with 2D fluoroscopy than with 3D navigation (9% vs 0.5%), which comprises the main cause for poor screw placement. Axial facet angles exceeding 45° at L4 and 60° at L5 were correlated with facet violations. <i>Conclusion</i>: This retrospective study found that 3D navigation is associated with lower facet violation rates in percutaneous lumbar pedicle screw placement when compared with 2D fluoroscopy. These findings suggest that 3D navigation may be of particular value when facet joints are coronally oriented.</p>","PeriodicalId":253125,"journal":{"name":"HSS Journal®: The Musculoskeletal Journal of Hospital for Special Surgery","volume":"17 3","pages":"281-288"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/15563316211026324","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"HSS Journal®: The Musculoskeletal Journal of Hospital for Special Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15563316211026324","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/7/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Background: The gold standard for percutaneous pedicle screw placement is 2-dimensional (2D) fluoroscopy. Data are sparse on the accuracy of 3-dimensional (3D) navigation percutaneous screw placement in minimally invasive spine procedures. Objective: We sought to compare a single surgeon's percutaneous pedicle screw placement accuracy using 2D fluoroscopy versus 3D navigation, as well as to investigate the effect of facet orientation on facet violation when using 2D fluoroscopy. Methods: We conducted a retrospective radiographic study of consecutive cohort of patients who underwent percutaneous lumbar instrumentation using either 2D fluoroscopy or 3D navigation. All procedures were performed by a single surgeon at 2 academic institutions between 2011 and 2018. Radiographic measurement of screw accuracy was assessed using a postoperative computed tomographic scan. The primary outcome was facet violation, and secondary outcomes were endplate/tip breaches, the Gertzbein-Robbins classification for cortical breaches, and the Simplified Screw Accuracy grade. Statistical comparisons were made between screws placed using 2D fluoroscopy versus 3D navigation. Axial facet angles were also measured to correlate with facet violation rates. Results: In the 138 patients included, 376 screws were placed with fluoroscopy and 193 with navigation. Superior (unfused) level facet violation was higher with 2D fluoroscopy than with 3D navigation (9% vs 0.5%), which comprises the main cause for poor screw placement. Axial facet angles exceeding 45° at L4 and 60° at L5 were correlated with facet violations. Conclusion: This retrospective study found that 3D navigation is associated with lower facet violation rates in percutaneous lumbar pedicle screw placement when compared with 2D fluoroscopy. These findings suggest that 3D navigation may be of particular value when facet joints are coronally oriented.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

经皮椎弓根螺钉置入侵犯小关节:三维导航和小关节方向的影响。
背景:经皮椎弓根螺钉置入的金标准是二维(2D)透视。在微创脊柱手术中,三维(3D)导航经皮螺钉置入的准确性数据很少。目的:我们试图比较一名外科医生使用2D透视与3D导航的经皮椎弓根螺钉置入准确性,并探讨在使用2D透视时,小关节面朝向对小关节面侵犯的影响。方法:我们对使用二维透视或三维导航进行经皮腰椎内固定的连续队列患者进行回顾性放射学研究。2011年至2018年期间,所有手术均由一名外科医生在两家学术机构进行。术后计算机断层扫描评估螺钉精度的x线测量。主要结果是关节突破坏,次要结果是终板/尖端破坏,皮质破坏的Gertzbein-Robbins分类和简化螺钉精度等级。采用二维透视与三维导航放置螺钉进行统计学比较。轴向小面角也被测量与小面违和率相关。结果:138例患者中,376例采用透视置入螺钉,193例采用导航置入螺钉。在2D透视下,高水平(未融合)关节突违和率高于3D导航(9% vs 0.5%),这是螺钉放置不良的主要原因。轴向关节突角度在L4超过45°,在L5超过60°与关节突侵犯相关。结论:本回顾性研究发现,与二维透视相比,三维导航与经皮腰椎椎弓根螺钉置入中较低的关节突侵犯率相关。这些研究结果表明,当小关节冠状面定向时,三维导航可能具有特别的价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书