Accuracy of freehand pedicle screws versus lateral mass screws in the subaxial cervical spine

Accurate Placement and Revisions for Cervical Pedicle Screws Placed With or Without Navigation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the accuracy of placement for cervical pedicle screws with and without the use of spinal navigation.

METHODS

A structured search was conducted in electronic databases without any language or date restrictions. Eligible studies reported the proportion of accurately placed cervical pedicle screws measured on intraoperative or postoperative 3D imaging, and reported whether intraoperative navigation was used during screw placement. Randomized Studies (MINORS) criteria were used to evaluate the methodological quality of how accuracy was assessed for cervical pedicle screws.

RESULTS

After screening and critical appraisal, 4697 cervical pedicle screws from 18 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled proportion for cervical pedicle screws with a breach up to 2 mm was 94% for navigated screws and did not differ from the pooled proportion for non-navigated screws (96%). The pooled proportion for cervical pedicle screws placed completely in the pedicle was 76% for navigated screws and did not differ from the pooled proportion for non-navigated screws (82%). Intraoperative screw reposition rates and screw revision rates as a result of postoperative imaging also did not differ between navigated and non-navigated screw placement.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review and meta-analysis found that the use of spinal navigation systems does not significantly improve the accuracy of placement of cervical pedicle screws compared to screws placed without navigation. Future studies evaluating intraoperative navigation for cervical pedicle screw placement should focus on the learning curve, postoperative complications, and the complexity of surgical cases.

Comparison of Anterior Cervical Discectomy Fusion Combined with Lateral Mass Screw and with Cervical Pedicle Screw Fixation Surgery under O-Arm Navigation for Single-Stage Management of Severe Lower Cervical Fracture Dislocation

OBJECTIVE

The incidence of severe lower cervical fractures and dislocations due to trauma has increased significantly, and the optimal treatment remains controversial. This study compares the safety and efficacy of anterior cervical discectomy fusion (ACDF) combined with lateral mass screw (LMS) and with cervical pedicle screw (CPS) fixation surgery under O-arm navigation as single-stage treatments of severe lower cervical fracture dislocations.

METHODS

Data from 48 patients who underwent ACDF + CPS (Group A) or ACDF + LMS (Group B) for severe lower cervical fracture dislocation between January 2016 and September 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Groups A and B comprised 25 and 23 cases, respectively. Clinical parameters, such as operative time, intraoperative blood loss, number of fixed segments, posterior incision length, operative complications, and hospitalization days were recorded. Preoperatively and postoperatively, the sub-axial injury classification (SLIC) score, the American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) impairment scale, and the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score were recorded and analyzed using Student's t-test.

RESULTS

The SLIC scores were 7.1 ± 1.2 and 7.5 ± 1.1, ASIA were 1.5 ± 0.6 and 1.2 ± 0.6, JOA score improvements were 3.2 ± 2.4 and 3.0 ± 2.1, operative times were 282.1 ± 91.7 and 266.5 ± 88.2 min, intraoperative blood losses were 437.8 ± 118.5 and 418.7 ± 104.2 mL, fixed segments were 2.8 ± 0.7 and 4.8 ± 1.1, and lengths of posterior incisions were 12.7 ± 2.8 and 13.8 ± 3.2 cm in Groups A and B, respectively. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the operative time, intraoperative blood loss, incision length, and postoperative recovery; however, group A had more fixed segments. At the final follow-up, no intraoperative or postoperative complications directly caused by the implant were present. Throughout the follow-up, all cases showed recovery and progressive improvement.

CONCLUSION

Both ACDF + LMS and ACDF + CPS under O-arm navigation can safely and effectively restore cervical vertebral sequence, fully release spinal canal compression, and promote patients' neurological recovery. Thus, both are effective treatments for severe lower cervical fracture dislocations. However, compared to LMS, CPS under O-arm navigation has shorter fixed segments and induces less trauma.

Complications associated with subaxial placement of pedicle screws versus lateral mass screws in the cervical spine (C2-T1): systematic review and meta-analysis comprising 4,165 patients and 16,669 screws

Lateral mass screw (LMS) and cervical pedicle screw (CPS) fixation are among the most popular techniques for posterior fusion of the cervical spine. Early research prioritized the LMS approach as the trajectory resulted in fewer neurovascular complications; however, with the incorporation of navigation assistance, the CPS approach should be re-evaluated. Our objective was to report the findings of a meta-analysis focused on comparing the LMS and CPS techniques in terms of rate of various complications with inclusion of all levels from C2 to T1. We conducted a systematic review of PubMed and EMBASE databases with final inclusion criteria focused on identifying studies that reported outcomes and complications for either the CPS or LMS technique. These studies were then pooled, and statistical analyses were performed from the cumulative data. A total of 60 studies comprising 4165 participants and 16,669 screws placed within the C2-T1 levels were identified. Within these studies, the LMS group had a significantly increased odds for lateral mass fractures (odds ratio [OR] = 43.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.62-711.42), additional cervical surgeries (OR = 5.56, 95%CI = 2.95-10.48), and surgical site infections (SSI) (OR = 5.47, 95%CI = 1.65-18.16). No other significant differences between groups in terms of complications were identified. Within the subgroup analysis of navigation versus non-navigation-guided CPS placement, no significant differences were identified for individual complications, although collectively significantly fewer complications occurred with navigation (OR = 5.29, 95%CI = 2.03-13.78). The CPS group had significantly fewer lateral mass fractures, cervical revision surgeries, and SSIs. Furthermore, navigation-assisted CPS placement was associated with a significant reduction in complications overall.

Complications associated with subaxial placement of pedicle screws versus lateral mass screws in the cervical spine: systematic review and meta-analysis comprising 1768 patients and 8636 screws

Lateral mass screw (LMS) fixation for the treatment of subaxial cervical spine instability or deformity has been traditionally associated with few neurovascular complications. However, cervical pedicle screw (CPS) fixation has recently increased in popularity, especially with navigation assistance, because of the higher pullout strength of the pedicle screws. To their knowledge, the authors conducted the first meta-analysis comparing the complication rates during and/or after CPS and LMS placement for different pathologies causing cervical spine instability. A systematic literature search of PubMed and Embase from inception to January 12, 2021 was performed to identify studies reporting CPS and/or LMS-related complications. Complications were categorized into intraoperative and early postoperative (within 30 days of surgery) and late postoperative (after 30 days from surgery) complications. All studies that met the prespecified inclusion criteria were pooled and cumulatively analyzed. A total of 24 studies were conducted during the time frame of the search and comprising 1768 participants and 8636 subaxially placed screws met the inclusion criteria. The CPS group experienced significantly more postoperative C5 palsy (odds ratio [OR] = 3.48, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.27-9.53, p < 0.05). Otherwise, there were no significant differences between the LMS and CPS groups. There were no significant differences between the CPS and LMS groups in terms of neurovascular procedure-related complications other than significantly more C5 palsy in the CPS group.

Robotic Assistance for Minimally Invasive Cervical Pedicle Instrumentation: Report on Feasibility and Safety

BACKGROUND

Accurate screw placement remains challenging, especially in the cervical spine. We present our first experience of minimally invasive posterior cervical and upper thoracic pedicle screw fixation in the lower cervical spine.

METHODS

This study reports a case series of patients, undergoing posterior percutaneous pedicle fixation using Cirq robotic assistance coupled to the Airo intraoperative computed tomography scan and Brainlab navigation system. Routine computed tomography was performed on postoperative day 2 to evaluate pedicle screw placement. The effective dose was calculated.

RESULTS

Between February 2020 and December 2020, 7 patients (4 men and 3 women) were treated. The mean age was 58.8 years (range, 29-75 years). Fixation was performed with a cannulated PASS OCT Reconstruction System (Medicrea). Overall, 28 screws were placed within cervical and upper thoracic pedicles. According to the Neo and Heary classification, 85.7% were rated as acceptable and 14.3% as poor. The radiation dose received by the patient was 9.1 mSv (range, 7.7-10.6 mSv). The radiation dose received by the surgical staff was 0 mSv. The postoperative course was excellent.

CONCLUSIONS

Posterior miniopen fixation using Cirq robotic assistance coupled with an intraoperative computed tomography navigation system is a major innovation that can improve the accuracy of pedicle screw positioning, with acceptable patient radiation and reduced surgical team exposure.