Thoracic vertebral screw impingement on the aorta in an in vivo bovine model

Screw Malposition: Are There Long-term Repercussions to Malposition of Pedicle Screws?

BACKGROUND/INTRODUCTION

Pedicle screws have long been part of the continued advancements in spine surgery. Despite the many techniques that have been devised for their safe placement, malposition of screws continues to occur. Studies have evaluated the possible safe limits of screw malposition, and have given some insight on anatomic variation in spinal deformity. Review of the literature reveals several cases of deleterious long-term sequelae of malpositioned screws.

DISCUSSION

With the current experience, proposed recommendations are provided to detect and avoid the potential long-term sequelae. Though the literature has helped to define possible concerning screws, there are no good studies predicting long-term risk.

CONCLUSION

Improvements in technology and techniques, advancements in intraoperative confirmation and postoperative surveillance, studies that assist risk stratification, and expert consensus evaluations will help guide surgeons in their decision for addressing misplaced screws.

Aortic injury in spine surgery……What a spine surgeon needs to know

Aortic injury is a rare, yet underreported and underestimated complication of spine surgery. Anatomical relation between the aorta and the spine changes under physiological (positional) as well as pathological (deformity) conditions, which puts the aorta at risk of injury during spine surgery. Clinical presentation of aortic injury ranges from asymptomatic perforation of the aorta to acute fatal bleeding. Although several diagnostic methods have been reported, CT-angiography remains an important diagnostic study. Several advancements in the open and the endovascular surgical management have been reported to be successfully used in the management of aortic injury following spine surgery. Management approach of malpositioned screws abutting the aorta is still controversial. Anatomical knowledge and understanding of the previously reported mechanisms of aortic injury are important to be integrated in the preoperative planning process. If the complication occurs, time-to- recognition and to-appropriate-management are important factors for predicting mortality. If unrecognized and untreated in the acutely injured patients, mortality can approach 100%.

Delayed Presentation of Thoracic Aortic Pseudoaneurysm Following Pedicle Screw Implantation: A Case Report

Background

Pedicle screw insertion has been known to have several complications even in the most skilled surgical hands. However, injury to the thoracic aorta during pedicle screw insertion is rare, delayed presentation secondary to pseudoaneurysm is even rarer, the pseudoaneurysm formation caused by a series of malpositioned pedicle screws has perhaps not been reported so far.

Case presentation

In this paper, we report here a case in which inadvertent injury to the thoracic aorta resulted in pseudoaneurysm, its manifestation was initially vague, resulting in a delayed diagnosis. Delayed aortic pseudoaneurysm or injury can be asymptomatic for a long time. Patients with renewed or continued back pain should alert orthopaedic surgeons regarding the possibility of pseudoaneurysms, regardless of the period that has elapsed after pedicle screw implantation.

Malpositioned pedicle screw in spine deformity surgery endangering the aorta: report of two cases, review of literature, and proposed management algorithm

STUDY DESIGN

Case reports and review of the literature with a proposed management algorithm.

OBJECTIVES

To report two cases of a potential vascular complication due to an incorrectly placed pedicle screw (PS) during spine deformity surgery. Relevant literature regarding the management of vascular complications is reviewed, and an evidence-based management algorithm is proposed. Aortic lesions represent a rare but potentially life-threatening complications with spine deformity and revision surgery, significantly increasing the risk. A management algorithm for an aortic lesion in the case of a malpositioned PS has not yet been published.

METHODS

Case 1: An 18-year-old female with proximal thoracic spinal non-instrumented fusion underwent a revision corrective procedure due to a progressive right-sided thoracolumbar compensatory curve. However, postoperative computed tomography (CT) performed to evaluate the position of the PS revealed malposition of the left T9 PS, which was abutting the descending aorta with CT angiography excluding the perforation of the aorta. Case 2: A 17-year-old male was scheduled for correction of Lenke 3-C-N adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Postoperative routine evaluation with low-dose CT revealed a left T9 PS paravertebral malposition, and subsequent CTA demonstrated that the thread of the PS was in contact with the descending thoracic aorta and an unlikely hemodynamically significant vessel injury.

RESULTS

Successful removal of both malpositioned PS was performed. In the first case, a cardiovascular surgeon attended the operation if an urgent thoracotomy was needed, and in the second case, additional video-assisted thoracoscopic control of the aorta was performed during PS removal.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative imaging in spinal surgery is essential to avoid major vascular and other complications when placing PS, especially in thoracic deformities. When a potential major vessel complication emerges, an interdisciplinary approach and an appropriate management algorithm are mandatory to make the best clinical decisions.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

How to improve the safety of bicortical pedicle screw insertion in the thoracolumbar vertebrae: analysis base on three-dimensional CT reconstruction of patients in the prone position

BACKGROUND

Through the comparison of three-dimensional CT reconstruction between the supine position and the prone position, the relative position of thoracolumbar great vessels and vertebral body was studied, and the shortest safe distance between them was measured to improve the safety of bicortical pedicle screw insertion and reduce the risk of vascular injury.

METHODS

Forty adults were selected to participate the research. Three-dimensional reconstruction of thoracolumbar (T9-L3) CT was performed in the prone position and the supine position. The relative distance between the Aorta/Inferior Vena Cava (IVC) and vertebral body was obtained as AVD/VVD respectively. The relative angle of the Aorta/ IVC and the vertebral body was calculated as ∠AOY/∠VOY. Self-controlled experiments were carried out in the prone and the supine positions, and the data obtained were analyzed using SPSS 22.0 statistical software.

RESULTS

The AVD of the prone position and the supine position was the shortest at T12 (3.18 ± 0.68 mm), but the difference was not statistically significant. The aorta of the T9-L3 segment was shifted from the anterolateral to the anteromedial. The ∠AOY of the other groups differed significantly between the prone and supine positions in all vertebrae except T12 and L1 (P < 0.05), and the aorta in the prone position was more anteromedial than that of supine position. With regard to VVD/∠VOY, there was no significant difference between the prone and supine positions (P ≥ 0.05), and the minimum VVD of L3 segment is greater than 5.4 mm. The IVC has no obvious mobility and is fixed in the range of 20 ° ~ 30 ° near the midline.

CONCLUSION

When using bicortical anchoring of pedicle screws, it is safe to ensure that the protruding tips of the screw is less than 3 mm. Due to the mobility of the aorta in different postures and individual differences in anatomy, the prone position CT can help doctors to make better preoperative plans and decisions.

Complications of Thoracolumbar Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery

Adult spinal deformity (ASD) is a challenging problem for spine surgeons given the high risk of complications, both medical and surgical. Surgeons should have a high index of suspicion for medical complications, including cardiac, pulmonary, thromboembolic, genitourinary and gastrointestinal, renal, cognitive and psychiatric, and skin conditions, in the perioperative period and have a low threshold for involving specialists. Surgical complications, including neurologic injuries, vascular injuries, proximal junctional kyphosis, durotomy, and pseudarthrosis and rod fracture, can be devastating for the patient and costly to the health-care system. Mortality rates have been reported to be between 1.0% and 3.5% following ASD surgery. With the increasing rate of ASD surgery, surgeons should properly counsel patients about these risks and have a high index of suspicion for complications in the perioperative period.

Aortic Injury by Thoracic Pedicle Screw. When Is Aortic Repair Required? Literature Review and Three New Cases

PURPOSE

Aortic injury by pedicle screw is rare but can cause serious complications. It has not been clearly determined when aortic repair is necessary in cases of screw impingement without perforation of the aortic wall. In this article, we review the treatment and clinical course of pedicle screw aortic impingement and attempt to clarify this issue.

METHODS

Cases of aortic injury during thoracic screw procedures were found using a MEDLINE search and analyzed together with 3 new cases that we present.

RESULTS

Nineteen cases collected from the literature and 3 new cases were included in the study. In 7 of the cases, aortic impingement by the pedicle screw was detected during postoperative follow-up (day 1) radiologic examinations. In the other cases, time to presentation of aortic impingement ranged between 2 weeks and 60 months after fixation. The main indications for thoracic spinal fixation were post-traumatic vertebral fracture and kyphoscoliosis/scoliosis. Repair of the aortic damage ranged from primary repair to stent and tube graft placement by the thoracic endovascular aortic repair method.

CONCLUSIONS

In cases in which the screw impinges less than 5 mm into the aortic wall, hardware revision without aortic repair may be sufficient if recognized early and there are no sign of aortic leakage in vascular imaging. However, cases with more than 5 mm of screw impingement should undergo aortic repair first, even in the absence of aortic leakage, following by screw revision.

Pedicle Screw Safety: How Much Anterior Breach Is Safe?: A Cadaveric and CT-Based Study

MINI: The objective of this study was to determine the safety limits of anterior/anterolateral pedicle screw breaches. Through clinical and cadaveric study, it appears that less than 4 mm of breach has a significantly lower likelihood of impingement on vital structures (P < 0.001).

STUDY DESIGN

Clinical retrospective chart review and basic science study.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the safety limits of an anterior/anterorolateral misplaced pedicle screw on computed tomography (CT) scan in spinal deformity.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Although the limits of medial breaches (<4 mm) are known, the safe limits for anterior/anterolateral breaches in spine deformity are not yet defined.

METHODS

The present study had two parts. In part I, postoperative CT scans of 165 patients operated on for spine deformity were reviewed for screw misplacement (2800 screws). The amount of anterior/anterolateral breach was measured. Protrusions were also evaluated for proximity to vital structures. All scans were reviewed by musculoskeletal radiologist. In part II, eight cadavers were instrumented with 6 × 30 and 6 × 40 mm bilaterally from T1-S1. Screws were randomly inserted under navigation guidance either "IN" or "OUT-anterior/lateral." CT scan was performed, followed by gross dissection to determine screw position.

RESULTS

Part I: 116(4.2%) screws were misplaced anterior/anterolaterally. Thirty-one (26.7%) were adjacent to vital structures. Fisher exact test showed 4 mm or less breach has significantly lower likelihood of impingement (P < 0.001). Screws adjacent/impinging the aorta protruded an average 5.7 ± 0.6 mm, whereas screws not involving the aorta breached an average 3.9 ± 0.2 mm, (P < 0.001). Part II: 285 screws were inserted. On CT scan, 125 were misplaced anterior/anterolaterally. On gross dissection, 89 were visibly misplaced; 23 were covered entirely by soft tissue but were palpable; and 13 were contained in bone. All 23 screws did not endanger any structures and protruded less than 4 mm on CT scan.

CONCLUSION

Anterior/anterolateral breaches of 4 mm or less on CT poses no significant risk of impingement and therefore can be considered safe.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Anterior cage dislodgement in posterior lumbar interbody fusion: a review of 12 patients

OBJECTIVE Interbody fusion cages are widely used to achieve initial fixation and secure spinal fusion; however, there are certain technique-related complications. Although anterior cage dislodgement can cause major vascular injury, the incidence is extremely rare. Here, the authors performed a review of anterior cage dislodgement following posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) surgery. METHODS The authors retrospectively reviewed the cases of 4625 patients who had undergone PLIF at 6 institutions between December 2007 and March 2015. They investigated the incidence and causes of surgery-related anterior cage dislodgement, salvage mechanisms, and postoperative courses. RESULTS Anterior cage dislodgement occurred in 12 cases (0.26%), all of which were caused by technical errors. In 9 cases, excessive cage impaction resulted in dislodgement. In 2 cases, when the cage on the ipsilateral side was inserted, it interacted and pushed out the other cage on the opposite side. In 1 case, the cage was positioned in an extreme lateral and anterior part of the intervertebral disc space, and it postoperatively dislodged. In 3 cases, the cage was removed in the same operative field. In the remaining 9 cases, CT angiography was performed postoperatively to assess the relationship between the dislodged cage and large vessels. Dislodged cages were conservatively observed in 2 cases. In 7 cases, the cage was removed because it was touching or compressing large vessels, and an additional anterior approach was selected. In 2 patients, there was significant bleeding from an injured inferior vena cava. There were no further complications or sequelae associated with the dislodged cages during the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS Although rare, iatrogenic anterior cage dislodgement following a PLIF can occur. The authors found that technical errors made by experienced spine surgeons were the main causes of this complication. To prevent dislodgement, the surgeon should be cautious when inserting the cage, avoiding excessive cage impaction and ensuring cage control. Once dislodgement occurs, the surgeons must immediately address this difficult complication. First, the possibility of a large vessel injury should be considered. If the patient's vital signs are stable, the surgeon should continue with the surgery without cage removal and perform CT angiography postoperatively to assess the cage location. Blind maneuvers should be avoided when the surgical site cannot be clearly viewed. When the cage compresses or touches the aortic artery or vena cava, it is better to remove the cage to avoid late-onset injury to major vessels. When the cage does not compress or touch vessels, its removal is controversial. The risk factors associated with performing another surgery should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

Are We Underestimating the Significance of Pedicle Screw Misplacement?

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective review of charts, x-rays (XRs) and computed tomography (CT) scans was performed.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the accuracy of pedicle screw placement using a novel classification system to determine potentially significant screw misplacement.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The accuracy rate of pedicle screw (PS) placement varies from 85% to 95% in the literature. This demonstrates technical ability but does not represent the impact of screw misplacement on individual patients. This study quantifies the rate of screw misplacement on a per-patient basis to highlight its effect on potential morbidity.

METHODS

A retrospective review of charts, XRs and low-dose CT scans of 127 patients who underwent spinal fusion with pedicle screws for spinal deformity was performed. Screws were divided into four categories: screws at risk (SAR), indeterminate misplacements (IMP), benign misplacements (BMP), accurately placed (AP).

RESULTS

A total of 2724 screws were placed in 127 patients. A total of 2396 screws were placed accurately (87.96%). A total of 247 screws (9.07%) were BMP, 52 (1.91%) were IMP, and 29 (1.06%) were considered SAR. Per-patient analysis showed 23 (18.11%) of patients had all screws AP. Thirty-five (27.56%) had IMP and 18 (14.17%) had SAR. Risk factor analysis showed smaller Cobb angles increased likelihood of all screws being AP. Sub-analysis of adolescent idiopathic scoliotic patients showed no curve or patient characteristic that correlated with IMP or SAR. Over 40% of patients had screws with either some/major concern.

CONCLUSION

Overall reported screw misplacement is low, but it does not reflect the potential impact on patient morbidity. Per-patient analysis reveals more concerning numbers toward screw misplacement. With increasing pedicle screw usage, the number of patients with misplaced screws will likely increase proportionally. Better strategies need to be devised for evaluation of screw placement, including establishment of a national database of deformity surgery, use of intra-operative image guidance, and reevaluation of postoperative low-dose CT imaging.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Delayed Presentation of Aortic Injury by a Thoracic Pedicle Screw

Delayed presentation of a thoracic aortic injury is an extremely rare complication after spine surgery. We report a case of delayed presentation of a thoracic aortic injury with a vertebral pedicle screw after posterior spinal surgery without periaortic hematoma, hemorrhage or pseudoaneurysm formation and review the relevant literature.

CT-Based Anatomical Evaluation of Pre-Vertebral Structures With Respect to Vertebral Body Using a Clock-Face Analogy

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective Chart and CT Scan Review.

OBJECTIVE

To define the relationship of the pre-vertebral structures for each level to assist in easier intraoperative visualization.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Vascular and visceral injuries from pedicle screws are well-known. This study will define the relationship of the pre-vertebral structures for each level to assist in avoiding potential complications.

METHODS

Pre- and post-operative CT scans were reviewed to define the pre-vertebral structures in relation to a clock-face. On reformatted axial slices, a clock-face was superimposed so that the left transverse process (TP) represented 8 o'clock and the right TP represented 4 o'clock. The positions of the TP on the clock-face did not change with rotation of the vertebra.

RESULTS

108 patients had pre-operative CT scans. 78 had post-operative CT scans. Median age was 15 years, median Cobb angle was 50°, fused were 12, with 21 fixation points. 6324 axial CT slices were reformatted and analyzed. The trachea was located at 12 o'clock at T1, 1 o'clock at T2-T4, and between 12 and 1 o'clock at T5. The esophagus starts as a midline structure at 12 o'clock from T1-T2, moves to 11 o'clock from T3-T6, and further to 10 o'clock from T7-T9. The aorta starts at 10 o'clock at T5-T6, moves left at T7-T8 to 9 o'clock, and returns to 10 o'clock from T9-T11. It appears at 11'clock at T12, and at 12 o'clock from L1-L4. In about a third of cases, it is at 1 o'clock from L1 to L4, where it bifurcates.

CONCLUSIONS

This CT-based anatomical study provides a simple reference frame to help surgeons visualize the vital structures at each level. This three-dimensional visualization is facilitated by fixing the position of TP on the clock-face. Knowledge of this anatomical relationship can help avoid direct injury, and is easier to recall intra-operatively.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Incidence and clinical significance of vascular encroachment resulting from freehand placement of pedicle screws in the thoracic and lumbar spine: analysis of 6816 consecutive screws

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective case series.

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate the incidence and clinical significance of vascular encroachment resulting from freehand placement of pedicle screws in the thoracic and lumbosacral spine.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Pedicle screws are routinely used to effectively stabilize all 3 columns of the spine but can be technically demanding to place in the setting of variable anatomy. There is a paucity of data regarding iatrogenic major vascular injuries during posterior instrumentation procedures.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the records of all patients undergoing freehand pedicle screw placement without image guidance in the thoracic or lumbar spine during a 7-year period. The incidence and extent of vascular encroachment by a pedicle screw was determined by review of routine postoperative computed tomographic scans obtained within 24 hours of all surgical procedures. Vascular encroachment was defined as a pedicle screw that was touching or deforming the wall of a major vessel.

RESULTS

A total of 964 patients received 6816 freehand-placed pedicle screws in the thoracolumbar spine. Fifteen (0.22%) screws that encroached a major vascular structure were identified. Ten (0.29%) thoracic pedicle screws encroached on the aorta, 4 (0.14%) lumbar screws on the common iliac vein, and 1 S1 screw (0.19%) on the internal iliac vein. In consultation with vascular surgery, it was determined whether revision surgery and the technique/approach for the revision procedure should be recommended. Two (0.21%) patients required revision surgery to remove the encroaching pedicle screw (T5 and T8) due to concern for vascular injury. Both patients were asymptomatic and recovered without further complications after revision surgery.

CONCLUSION

Vascular encroachment of major vessels occurs rarely in the setting of freehand pedicle screw placement in the thoracolumbar spine. Although rare, delayed vascular injury from errant pedicle screw placement has been reported in the literature. The aorta seems to be the vessel at the highest risk of injury. Routine intraoperative or postoperative computed tomographic scanning allows for early identification of pedicle screws encroaching on vascular structures thereby facilitating early revision surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

Periaortic pedicle screw removal with endovascular control of the aorta and intraoperative aortography: a case report and review of the literature

Study Design  Case report and review of the literature.

Objective The objective of the article is to report the case of a 20-year-old patient with a threatened aortic injury from pedicle screw instrumentation successfully managed without aortic grafting.

Methods The patient's clinical course is retrospectively reviewed. The offending hardware was removed after gaining endovascular control of the aorta.

Results Intraoperative aortography was normal and no graft was placed. The patient remains asymptomatic at 2 years after surgery.

Conclusions Hardware impinging on the aorta can safely be removed by gaining endovascular control of the aorta. In the setting of normal intraoperative aortography in a young patient, we recommend against further intervention to avoid the known morbidity of aortic grafting.

Combined thoracic endovascular aortic repair and neurosurgical intervention for injury due to posterior spine surgery

Aortic injuries represent a rare but life-threatening complication of spinal surgery. Perforation of the aorta due to pedicle screw penetration or misplacement can lead to immediate bleeding with hemodynamic instability or to pseudoaneurysm development with delayed risk of rupture, which can occur weeks to months later. Recently, thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in aortic trauma has contributed to a reduction of both mortality and morbidity. The literature on this subject is reviewed.

The position of the aorta changes with altered body position in single right thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a magnetic resonance imaging study

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective clinical magnetic resonance imaging study.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the differences in the position of the aorta relative to the spine in patients with single right thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (RT-AIS) in 2 different body positions (supine and prone).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Pedicle screws are used widely in scoliosis surgery. With an increase in the incidence of vascular complications that result from misplaced pedicle screws, studies regarding the spatial relationship of the aorta and the vertebral body have also gradually increased and show that the aorta is positioned more posteriorly in patients with RT-AIS than in normal subjects. In these imaging studies, the patients received computed tomographic or magnetic resonance (MR) scans in the supine position. Recent studies of subjects without a spinal deformity found that the aorta moves from a posterolateral to an anteromedial position when the subject changes from a supine position to a prone position. However, no studies investigated aorta shifting with changing body position in patients with AIS.

METHODS

Twenty-six patients with single RT-AIS were recruited into this study. Each patient received an axial MR scan from T5 through L3 in both the supine and prone positions. In the Cartesian coordinate system, the left pedicle-aorta (LtP-Ao) angle, LtP-Ao distance, and vertebral rotation angle were measured from T5 through L3 in the axial plane MR images. We also simulated misplacement of the pedicle screw with commonly used length and 20° direction error, and the potential risk of aorta impingement was defined as the virtual pedicle screw crossing the aorta. The paired sample t test was used to compare these parameters between the 2 body positions.

RESULTS

The mean LtP-Ao angle and mean LtP-Ao distance differed between the body positions at each level. At the T5-T10 levels, the patients in the prone position exhibited significantly smaller LtP-Ao angles (26.2° vs. 38.8°; P, 0.01) and distances (27.0 vs. 30.7 mm; P, 0.01) than those in the supine position. The vertebral rotation angle was larger in the prone position than in the supine position at periapical levels, although this difference did not reach statistical significance (P . 0.05). The percentage of potential risk of aorta impingement was significantly higher in the prone position than in the supine position at the T5-T10 levels (19.7% vs. 6.6%, respectively; P, 0.05). CONCLUSION.: The aorta shifts more anteromedially and more closely to the spine at the T5-T10 levels when patients with RT-AIS change from the supine to the prone position. Thus, in the prone position, the aorta is potentially at a higher risk for injury from anterior and lateral cortex penetration by the left pedicle screws. The spinal surgeon should be aware of these altered conditions to avoid injury to the aorta during pedicle screw insertion in patients with RT-AIS who are in the prone position.

Delayed aortic rupture after aortic endograft placement in patient with spinal hardware

Aortic injuries presenting in a delayed fashion after attempted repair of an acute injury are uncommon. We report a case of a patient presenting with an initial aortic injury associated with thoracic spinal hardware placement, which was repaired with an open and endovascular approach, and 5 months later presented with hemoptysis. The cause of hemoptysis was erosion of the descending thoracic aorta between the spinal hardware and the thoracic endograft. The patient underwent descending aorta replacement with a Dacron tube graft, removal of the hardware, and coverage with a pedicled omental flap. This is a unique presentation of erosion of the aorta between the spinal hardware and the earlier placed endovascular stent-graft.

A retrospective analysis of pedicle screws in contact with the great vessels

Object

Pedicle screws placed in the thoracic, lumbar, and sacral spine occasionally come in contact with the aorta, vena cava, or iliac vessels. When such screws are seen on postoperative imaging in an asymptomatic patient, the surgeon must decide whether it is riskier to revise the screw or to observe it. The authors hypothesized that the incidence of screw placement causing perioperative vessel injury is low and, further, that screws placed in contact with major vessels do not always result in vessel injury.

Methods

A retrospective review of the operative records of 182 consecutive patients undergoing thoracic, lumbar, and lumbosacral pedicle screw fusion was performed to determine the frequency of intraoperative vessel injury. Postoperative imaging for 107 patients was available to determine the incidence of screws in contact with major vessels. Charts were examined to determine if any adverse sequelae had resulted from malpositioned screws. Patient outcomes were documented.

Results

There were no intraoperative vessel injuries or deaths in 182 consecutive operations. One hundred seven patients with available postoperative films had 680 pedicle screws placed between T-3 and the sacrum during 115 operations. No patient had arterial screw penetration or deformation on postoperative imaging. Thirty-three of the 680 inserted screws were in contact with a major vessel on routine postoperative imaging. The contacted vessels included the aorta (4 cases), the iliac artery (7 cases), and the iliac veins (22 cases). Patients were followed up until death or November 2009, for a mean follow-up of 44 months (median 44 months, range 5–109 months). None of the patients with vessel contact was noted to suffer symptoms or sequelae as a result of vessel contact. Radiographic follow-up as long as 50 months after surgery revealed no detectable vessel abnormality at the contacted site.

Conclusions

Placing pedicle screws in contact with major vessels is a known risk of spinal surgery. The risk of repositioning a screw in contact with a major vessel but causing no symptoms must be weighed against the relative risk of leaving it in place.

New parameters to represent the position of the aorta relative to the spine for pedicle screw placement

Parameters of the position of the aorta in previous reports were determined for anterior surgery. This study evaluated the relative position of the aorta to the spine by new parameters, which could enhance the safety of pedicle screw placement. Three parameters were defined in a new Cartesian coordinate system. We selected an entry point of a left pedicle screw as the origin. The transverse plane was determined to include both the bases of the superior facet and to be parallel to the upper endplate of the vertebral body. A line connecting the entry points of both sides was defined as the X-axis. The angle formed by the Y-axis and a line connecting the origin and the center of the aorta was defined as the left pedicle-aorta angle. The length of a line connecting the origin and the aorta edge was defined as the left pedicle-aorta distance. Distance from the edge of the aorta to the X-axis was defined as the pedicular line-aorta distance. These parameters were measured preoperatively in 293 vertebral bodies of 24 patients with a right thoracic curve. We simulated the placement of the pedicle screw with variable length and with some direction error. We defined a warning pedicle as that when the aorta enters the expected area of the screw. Sensitivity analysis was performed to find the warning pedicle ratio in 12 scenarios. The left pedicle-aorta angle averaged 29.7 degrees at the thoracic spine and -16.3 degrees at the lumbar spine; the left pedicle-aorta distance averaged 23.7 and 55.2 mm; the pedicular line-aorta distance averaged 18.3 and 51.0 mm, respectively. The ratio of warning pedicles was consistently high at T4-5 and T10-12. When a left pedicle screw perforates an anterior/lateral wall of the vertebral body, the aorta may be at risk. These new parameters enable surgeons to intuitively understand the position of the aorta in surgical planning or in placement of a pedicle screw.

Accuracy of thoracic vertebral screw insertion in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a comparison between thoracoscopic and mini-open thoracotomy approaches

STUDY DESIGN

A cross-sectional study with axial computed tomography (CT) to compare the accuracy of vertebral screw insertion in the thoracic spine for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) between the thoracoscopic and the mini-open thoracotomy approach.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety of vertebral screw placement in anterior instrumentation for thoracic AIS.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Thoracoscopic anterior instrumentation has been used with good results for AIS. It is technically demanding especially for the insertion of vertebral screws. The important issue of whether the screws inserted thoracoscopically is as accurate and safe as those inserted through thoracotomy approach has not been well studied.

METHODS

Thirty-one patients with thoracic AIS receiving thoracoscopic or mini-open thoracotomy anterior instrumentation were included in this study. They were divided into Group A and B, respectively. Postoperative sequential CT scanning on the thoracic vertebral screws was carried out. The relative position between screws and the spinal canal, the aorta, and the bicortical purchase were analyzed with CT images. The percentage of screws in good position was defined and further analyzed.

RESULTS

Seventy-three and 162 thoracic vertebral screws were inserted in 10 patients in Group A and 21 patients in Group B, respectively. Eighty-nine percent of screw tips in Group A and 80.2% in Group B were distant from the aorta, 89.0% and 87.0% of screws achieved bicortical purchase in Group A and B, respectively. No significant difference was found in all thoracic levels including the upper thoracic, periapical, or lower thoracic vertebrae. Seventy-four percent and 66.7% of screws were in good positions in Group A and B, respectively and there was no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

The vertebral screws inserted through thoracoscopic approach were as accurate as those inserted through a mini-open thoracotomy approach. The accuracy could be enhanced by using screws with smaller increments, with special attention to the possible migration of aorta with anterior spinal instrumentation.

Biomechanical comparison of different anchors (foundations) for the pediatric dual growing rod technique

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Children with early onset scoliosis benefit from early operative treatment with dual growing rods as they provide an "internal brace" for the spine and allow curve correction and sequential lengthenings to maximize thoracic cage development. The foundations that provide anchor points for the dual growing rods may incorporate hooks, screws, or a hybrid construct. It is unclear how stable different types of foundation constructs are with regard to pullout.

PURPOSE

This study was to determine the differences in stability between four foundation configurations used in the pediatric dual growing rod technique. Eight porcine spines were sectioned and randomly assigned to one of four foundation groups: 1) hook-hook with cross-link; 2) hook-screw with cross-link; 3) screw-screw with cross-link; and 4) screw-screw without cross-link. After instrumentation, biomechanical pullout tests were conducted. Ultimate failure loads, modes of failure, and level of instrumentation were analyzed.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Controlled in vitro laboratory investigation.

RESULTS

Screw-screw with cross-link constructs demonstrated the greatest failure load but this was not statistically significant compared with the screw-screw without cross-link constructs. Both screw-screw constructs were statistically stronger than either construct containing hooks. There was no difference between the hook-screw and hook-hook constructs that was statistically significant. Hook-containing constructs sustained higher failure loads in lumbar versus thoracic vertebrae.

CONCLUSIONS

A foundation composed of four pedicle screws implanted in two adjacent vertebral bodies provides the strongest construct in pullout testing. A cross-link does not seem to enhance fixation. Hook constructs are stronger in lumbar versus thoracic laminae.

The changes of relative position of the thoracic aorta after anterior or posterior instrumentation of type I Lenke curve in adolescent idiopathic thoracic scoliosis

The risk of impingement of the aorta associated with thoracic vertebral screw or pedicle screw instrumentation in the treatment of thoracic scoliosis has been an important concern. To understand this phenomenon more systematically, the relative position of the aorta with reference to the thoracic vertebrae in right thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) following anterior and posterior spinal instrumentation was analyzed in detail quantitatively; 34 patients underwent anterior (n = 14) or posterior (n = 20) spinal instrumentation were recruited in the present study. The relative position of the thoracic aorta, vertebral rotation, apical vertebral translation and thoracic kyphosis were measured from pre- and post-operative CT images from T5 to T12. The aorta was found to shift antero-medially in the anterior instrumentation group but not in the posterior spinal instrumentation group. It is likely that the disc removal, soft tissue release and spontaneous vertebral derotation of the scoliosis could account for the antero-medial shifting of the aorta. By the shifting, the space for contralateral screw penetration was reduced.