Cervical pedicle screws: comparative accuracy of two insertion techniques
Independently assessed radiographic and anatomic comparison of device implantation methods. To compare the relative accuracy of two techniques of inserting cervical pedicle screws. In an attempt to define the anatomic risks of cervical pedicle screw insertion, image-guided stereotactic technology wa...
Saved in:
Published in | Spine (Philadelphia, Pa. 1976) Vol. 25; no. 20; p. 2675 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
United States
15.10.2000
|
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get more information |
Cover
Loading…
Abstract | Independently assessed radiographic and anatomic comparison of device implantation methods.
To compare the relative accuracy of two techniques of inserting cervical pedicle screws.
In an attempt to define the anatomic risks of cervical pedicle screw insertion, image-guided stereotactic technology was shown to be superior to some other methods in vitro.- Meanwhile, in vivo experience with Abumi's technique of screw insertion has had few clinically relevant instances of screw malposition. There has been no direct comparison between current image-guided technology and Abumi's fluoroscopically assisted technique.
The pedicles (C3-C7) of human cadaveric cervical spines were instrumented with 3.5-mm screws with either of two techniques. Cortical integrity and potential neurovascular injury were independently assessed by computed tomographic (CT) scans and anatomic dissection. A cortical breach was considered "critical" if the screw encroached on any vital structure. If any part of the screw violated the cortex of the pedicle but no vital structure was at risk for injury, the breach was classified as "noncritical."
In Group I (StealthStation; Sofamor-Danek, Memphis, TN), 82% of screws were placed in the pedicle, and 18% had a critical breach. In Group II (Abumi technique), 88% of screws were placed in the pedicle, and 12% had a critical breach. No statistically significant differences were demonstrated between each group (P = 0.59). Regarding pedicle dimensions and safety of insertion, a critical pedicle diameter of 4.5 mm was determined to be the size below which a critical breach was likely, but above which there was a significantly greater likelihood for safe screw placement. The most common structure injured in each group was the vertebral artery.
The use of a computer-assisted image guidance system did not enhance safety or accuracy in placing pedicle screws compared with Abumi's technique. Both techniques have a noteworthy risk of injuring a critical structure if inserted into the pedicles with a diameter of less than 4.5 mm. Under laboratory conditions, pedicles with a diameter of more than 4.5 mm have a significantly greater likelihood of being safely instrumented by either technique. These data indicate that cervical pedicle screw placement is feasible, but it should be reserved for selected circumstances with clear indications and in the presence of suitable pedicle morphology. |
---|---|
AbstractList | Independently assessed radiographic and anatomic comparison of device implantation methods.
To compare the relative accuracy of two techniques of inserting cervical pedicle screws.
In an attempt to define the anatomic risks of cervical pedicle screw insertion, image-guided stereotactic technology was shown to be superior to some other methods in vitro.- Meanwhile, in vivo experience with Abumi's technique of screw insertion has had few clinically relevant instances of screw malposition. There has been no direct comparison between current image-guided technology and Abumi's fluoroscopically assisted technique.
The pedicles (C3-C7) of human cadaveric cervical spines were instrumented with 3.5-mm screws with either of two techniques. Cortical integrity and potential neurovascular injury were independently assessed by computed tomographic (CT) scans and anatomic dissection. A cortical breach was considered "critical" if the screw encroached on any vital structure. If any part of the screw violated the cortex of the pedicle but no vital structure was at risk for injury, the breach was classified as "noncritical."
In Group I (StealthStation; Sofamor-Danek, Memphis, TN), 82% of screws were placed in the pedicle, and 18% had a critical breach. In Group II (Abumi technique), 88% of screws were placed in the pedicle, and 12% had a critical breach. No statistically significant differences were demonstrated between each group (P = 0.59). Regarding pedicle dimensions and safety of insertion, a critical pedicle diameter of 4.5 mm was determined to be the size below which a critical breach was likely, but above which there was a significantly greater likelihood for safe screw placement. The most common structure injured in each group was the vertebral artery.
The use of a computer-assisted image guidance system did not enhance safety or accuracy in placing pedicle screws compared with Abumi's technique. Both techniques have a noteworthy risk of injuring a critical structure if inserted into the pedicles with a diameter of less than 4.5 mm. Under laboratory conditions, pedicles with a diameter of more than 4.5 mm have a significantly greater likelihood of being safely instrumented by either technique. These data indicate that cervical pedicle screw placement is feasible, but it should be reserved for selected circumstances with clear indications and in the presence of suitable pedicle morphology. |
Author | Heller, J G Ludwig, S C Edwards, 2nd, C C Kowalski, J M |
Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: S C surname: Ludwig fullname: Ludwig, S C organization: Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Rehabilitation, Penn State College of Medicine, Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, Pennsylvania, USA – sequence: 2 givenname: J M surname: Kowalski fullname: Kowalski, J M – sequence: 3 givenname: C C surname: Edwards, 2nd fullname: Edwards, 2nd, C C – sequence: 4 givenname: J G surname: Heller fullname: Heller, J G |
BackLink | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11034656$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed |
BookMark | eNo1j8tKAzEYhbOo2Iu-guQFRnObzMSdFC-Fghtdl-TPH4zMzWSmpW_vgPZszuFbHPjWZNH1HRJCObvnzFQPbE6lpSjEPDjjJSvmIcSCrJjUM1ZSL8k65-8Za8nNNVlyzqTSpV6R3RbTMYJt6IA-QoM0Q8JTfqTQt4NNdoxHpBZgShbOtA90PPU0dhnTGPuOjghfXfyZMN-Qq2CbjLf_vSGfL88f27di__662z7tCxB1ORa149xIMJ4LpRiwGp0wUHsMLhiwlQdpPJaIDp2sgprNBLPaBCUDKGvEhtz9_Q6Ta9EfhhRbm86Hi5P4BVyNUQs |
ContentType | Journal Article |
DBID | CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM |
DOI | 10.1097/00007632-200010150-00022 |
DatabaseName | Medline MEDLINE MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE MEDLINE PubMed |
DatabaseTitle | MEDLINE Medline Complete MEDLINE with Full Text PubMed MEDLINE (Ovid) |
DatabaseTitleList | MEDLINE |
Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database – sequence: 2 dbid: EIF name: MEDLINE url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=https://www.webofscience.com/wos/medline/basic-search sourceTypes: Index Database |
DeliveryMethod | no_fulltext_linktorsrc |
Discipline | Medicine |
ExternalDocumentID | 11034656 |
Genre | Journal Article Comparative Study |
GroupedDBID | --- .-D .55 .GJ .XZ .Z2 01R 0R~ 123 1CY 1J1 354 3EH 40H 4Q1 4Q2 4Q3 53G 5RE 5VS 6PF 71W 77Y 7O~ A9M AAAAV AAAXR AAGIX AAHPQ AAIQE AAJCS AAMOA AAMTA AAQQT AARTV AASOK AAUEB AAWTL AAXQO ABBUW ABDIG ABJNI ABOCM ABXVJ ABZAD ACCJW ACDDN ACEWG ACGFO ACGFS ACILI ACWDW ACWRI ACXNZ ADFPA ADGGA ADHPY ADNKB AE3 AE6 AEETU AENEX AFDTB AFEXH AFFNX AFUWQ AGINI AHOMT AHQNM AHVBC AIJEX AINUH AJIOK AJNWD AJNYG AJZMW ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS AMJPA AMNEI AWKKM BOYCO BQLVK BS7 C45 CGR CS3 CUY CVF DIWNM DU5 DUNZO E.X EBS ECM EIF EJD EX3 F2K F2L F2M F2N F5P FCALG FL- FW0 H0~ HZ~ IKREB IKYAY IN~ JF9 JG8 JK3 JK8 K8S KD2 KMI L-C L7B M18 N9A NPM N~7 N~B N~M O9- OAG OAH OCUKA ODA ODMTH OHH OHYEH OJAPA OL1 OLG OLH OLU OLV OLW OLY OLZ OPUJH ORVUJ OUVQU OVD OVDNE OVIDH OVLEI OVOZU OWBYB OWU OWV OWW OWX OWY OWZ OXXIT P2P R2J R58 RLZ S4R S4S SJN TEORI V2I VVN W3M WH7 WOQ WOW X3V X3W X7M XXN XYM YCJ YFH YOC YQJ YRY ZB8 ZFV ZGI ZY1 ZZMQN |
ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c285t-8b1193c9d12440c08eb29c8defbf9ca7dc39de5eebeb37f463220a69f43fc4a92 |
ISSN | 0362-2436 |
IngestDate | Sat Sep 28 08:38:27 EDT 2024 |
IsPeerReviewed | true |
IsScholarly | true |
Issue | 20 |
Language | English |
LinkModel | OpenURL |
MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c285t-8b1193c9d12440c08eb29c8defbf9ca7dc39de5eebeb37f463220a69f43fc4a92 |
PMID | 11034656 |
ParticipantIDs | pubmed_primary_11034656 |
PublicationCentury | 2000 |
PublicationDate | 2000-10-15 |
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2000-10-15 |
PublicationDate_xml | – month: 10 year: 2000 text: 2000-10-15 day: 15 |
PublicationDecade | 2000 |
PublicationPlace | United States |
PublicationPlace_xml | – name: United States |
PublicationTitle | Spine (Philadelphia, Pa. 1976) |
PublicationTitleAlternate | Spine (Phila Pa 1976) |
PublicationYear | 2000 |
SSID | ssj0006319 |
Score | 2.1000867 |
Snippet | Independently assessed radiographic and anatomic comparison of device implantation methods.
To compare the relative accuracy of two techniques of inserting... |
SourceID | pubmed |
SourceType | Index Database |
StartPage | 2675 |
SubjectTerms | Bone Screws - adverse effects Bone Screws - standards Bone Screws - statistics & numerical data Cadaver Cervical Vertebrae - anatomy & histology Cervical Vertebrae - diagnostic imaging Cervical Vertebrae - surgery Female Humans Internal Fixators - adverse effects Internal Fixators - standards Internal Fixators - statistics & numerical data Intraoperative Complications - classification Intraoperative Complications - etiology Male Radiography Spinal Fusion - adverse effects Spinal Fusion - instrumentation Spinal Fusion - methods Treatment Outcome |
Title | Cervical pedicle screws: comparative accuracy of two insertion techniques |
URI | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11034656 |
Volume | 25 |
hasFullText | |
inHoldings | 1 |
isFullTextHit | |
isPrint | |
link | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnV1LS-RAEG5GBdnLou66D3XpgzeJZLqTTuJNRBlnVYRV8CadfqDgzgw6w4BX__hW9WOmURfXvYSQZsJ0vi-V6uqqrwjZ1qK2bVHaTJZMZXDSzSR8CDJthURxFVG7WpjTM9G7LPpX5VWn85RkLU3G7a56fLWu5H9QhWuAK1bJvgPZ2U3hApwDvnAEhOH4TxgfuBcda6lwu-XO7IANwN7dsMpXiaq3VGpyj23dMR9gOsT8c8ymxm2CqOD6kDqpv0bB9cRoC8pIjm58Su253N3pgmeRhA9OJnp66yPO84Drz-EU5u4bYvfn8VbfINoRh_l4dhKk7ZlYlNgP_b5iLCJHI-6rMZMaLFZ4SZNoX1mZ8IjlqbUUvmvKCzPu5YHdNqvgDDFHKbzS1cD7MuYE3dFvBy_4MRzF394efSawHYcWyAJwE3unYsAnfMwFd71hZhMLyWBR9_O1v4c6tOGWz9Yqzme5WCEfw2KD7nvmrJKOGayR5dOQTvGJHEcC0UAg6gm0RxP60EgfOrQU6ENn9KFz-nwml0eHFwe9LPTWyBSry3FWt11w3VWj0b_LVV6bljWq1sa2tlGy0oo32pQG3vGWV7aAebJcisYW3KpCNmydLA6GA_OV0KrluMzQXfh9IbmSojasEpUxzOqy4d_IF_8QrkdeQOU6Pp7vfx3ZIB_AM218itQmWbLAWrMF7t-4_eEA-gNDeFCU |
link.rule.ids | 786 |
linkProvider | National Library of Medicine |
openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Cervical+pedicle+screws%3A+comparative+accuracy+of+two+insertion+techniques&rft.jtitle=Spine+%28Philadelphia%2C+Pa.+1976%29&rft.au=Ludwig%2C+S+C&rft.au=Kowalski%2C+J+M&rft.au=Edwards%2C+2nd%2C+C+C&rft.au=Heller%2C+J+G&rft.date=2000-10-15&rft.issn=0362-2436&rft.volume=25&rft.issue=20&rft.spage=2675&rft_id=info:doi/10.1097%2F00007632-200010150-00022&rft_id=info%3Apmid%2F11034656&rft_id=info%3Apmid%2F11034656&rft.externalDocID=11034656 |
thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=0362-2436&client=summon |
thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=0362-2436&client=summon |
thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=0362-2436&client=summon |