The Modified Iliac Screw: An Anatomic Comparison and Technical Guide

Modified Iliac Screw in Lumbopelvic Fixation After Sacral Tumor Resection: A Single-Center Case Series

BACKGROUND

Traditional iliac screw, S2-alar iliac screw, and modified iliac screw are the 3 common techniques for lumbopelvic fixation. The application of the modified iliac technique in sacral spinal tumors has been rarely reported.

OBJECTIVE

To report the feasibility and safety of modified iliac screws after sacral tumor resection and their preliminary clinical outcomes.

METHODS

Twenty-seven patients who underwent sacral tumor resection with modified iliac screw fixation between August 2017 and August 2021 at our center were clinically and radiographically evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 59 iliac screws were inserted by freehand according to the anatomic landmarks. The mean operation time was 207 minutes (range, 140-435 minutes). The average estimated blood loss was 1396 mL (300-4200 mL). Computed tomography scans showed that 2 (3.4%) screws penetrated the iliac cortex, indicating a 96.6% implantation accuracy rate. There were no iatrogenic neurovascular or visceral structure complications observed. The mean minimal distances from the screw head to the skin were 24.9 and 25.8 mm on the left and right sides, respectively. The mean minimal distances from the screw head to the horizontal level of the posterior superior iliac spine were 7.9 and 8.3 mm on the left and right sides, respectively. Two patients (7.4%) underwent reoperation for wound infection. At the latest follow-up, no patient had complications of screw head prominence, pseudarthrosis, or instrument failure.

CONCLUSION

The modified iliac screw is characterized by its minimal invasiveness and simplicity of placement. It is an ideal alternative for lumbopelvic fixation after sacral tumor resection.

Beyond Placement of Pedicle Screws - New Applications for Robotics in Spine Surgery: A Multi-Surgeon, Single-Institution Experience

Interest in robotic-assisted spine surgery has grown as surgeon comfort and technology has evolved to maximize benefits of time saving and precision. However, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has currently only approved robotics to assist in determining the ideal trajectory for pedicle screw placement after extensive research supporting its efficacy and efficiency. To be considered a durable and effective option, robotics need to expand beyond the indication of just placing pedicle screws. This article aims to illustrate a multi-surgeon, single-institution experience with unique applications of robotic technologies in spine surgery. We will explore accessing Kambin's Triangle in percutaneous transforaminal interbody fusion (percLIF), iliac fixation in metastatic cancer, and sacroiliac (SI) fusions. Each of these topics will be covered in depth with associated background information and subsequent discussion. We show that with proper understanding of its limitations, robots can help surgeons perform difficult surgeries in a safe manner.

Robotic-assisted percutaneous iliac screw fixation for destructive lumbosacral metastatic lesions: an early single-institution experience

BACKGROUND

Robotic-assisted surgery is becoming more widely applied in surgical subspecialties due to its intraoperative and postoperative advantages such as minimally invasive approach, reduced blood loss, shorter hospital stay, and decreased incidence of postoperative complications. However, robotic devices were only recently introduced in the field of spinal surgery. Specifically, percutaneous approaches involving computer-assisted image guidance are relatively new in iliac screw fixation. Previous methods focused on the use of S2-alar-iliac (S2AI) screw fixation which allows for pelvic fixation without a need for side connectors. However, for patients with destructive lesions of the sacrum, placement of these S2AI screws may not be feasible. The purpose of this technical note is to illustrate the implementation of robotic-assisted percutaneous iliac screw fixation in two cases which allows for minimally invasive attachment to the proximal lumbar screws without a side connector and eliminates a potential source of instrumentation failure.

METHODS

Robotic-assisted percutaneous iliac screw fixation was performed on two patients. The robotics system was used to merge the fluoroscopic images with intraoperative computed tomography (CT) images to plan the trajectories for placement of bilateral pedicle and iliac screws. Intraoperative CT scan was again performed to confirm proper placement of all screws. Rods were then engaged bilaterally with the pedicle and iliac screws without the use of side connectors.

RESULTS

The patients did not experience immediate postoperative complications and had stable hardware at one-month follow-up. Our cases demonstrate the surgical efficiency of robotic-assisted lumbo-iliac instrumentation which obviates the need to use a side connector, which is commonly used in iliac fixation. This eliminates a step, which can reduce the possibility of instrumentation failure.

CONCLUSION

Robotic-assisted percutaneous iliac screw fixation is a safe and feasible technique to improve operative and clinical outcomes in complex spinal instrumentation surgeries.

Fixation Strength of Modified Iliac Screw Trajectory Compared to Traditional Iliac and S2 Alar-Iliac Trajectories: A Cadaveric Study

OBJECTIVE

Traditional iliac (TI) screws require extensive dissection, involve offset-connectors, and have prominent screw heads that may cause patient discomfort. S2 alar-iliac (S2AI) screws require less dissection, do not need offset connectors, and are less prominent. However, the biomechanical consequences of S2AI screws crossing the alar-iliac joint is unknown. The present study investigates the fixation strength of a modified iliac (MI) screw, which has a more medial entry point and reduced screw prominence, but does not cross the alar-iliac joint.

METHODS

Eighteen sacropelvic spines were divided into 3 groups (n = 6): TI, S2AI, and MI. Each specimen was fixed unilaterally with S1 pedicle screws and pelvic fixation according to its group. Screws were loaded at ±10 Nm at 3Hz for 1000 cycles. Motion of each screw and rod strain above and below the S1 screw was measured.

RESULTS

Toggle of the S1 screw was lowest for the TI group, followed by the MI and S2AI groups, but there were no significant differences (P = 0.421). Toggle of the iliac screw relative to the pelvis was also lowest for the TI group, followed by the MI group, and was greatest for the S2AI group, without significant differences (P = 0.179). Rod strain was similar across all groups.

CONCLUSIONS

No statistically significant differences were found between the TI, S2AI, and MI techniques with regard to screw toggle or rod strain. Advantages of the MI screw include its lower profile and a medialized starting point eliminating the need for offset-connectors.