Zhai X, Li B, Chen K, Chen Z, Shao J, Chen K, Xu Q, Meng D, Fei Q, Jiang L, Bai Y, Li M. Spine Surgery with Electronic Conductivity Device: A Prospectively Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial and Literature Review.
Orthop Surg 2023;
15:2872-2880. [PMID:
37735987 PMCID:
PMC10622289 DOI:
10.1111/os.13880]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/15/2023] [Revised: 08/07/2023] [Accepted: 08/08/2023] [Indexed: 09/23/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE
Improving accuracy and safety of pedicle screw placement is of great clinical importance. Electronic conductivity device (ECD) can be a promising technique with features of affordability, portability, and real-time detection capabilities. This study aimed to validate the safety and effectiveness of a modified ECD.
METHODS
The ECD underwent a modification where six lamps of various colors, and it was utilized in a prospectively multicenter randomized controlled clinical trial involving 96 patients across three hospitals from June 2018 to December 2018. The trial incorporated a self-control randomization with an equal distribution of left or right side of vertebral pedicle among two groups: the free-hand group and the ECD group. A total of 496 pedicle screws were inserted, with 248 inserted in each group. The primary outcomes focused on the accuracy of pedicle screw placement and the frequency of intraoperative X-rays. Meanwhile, the secondary indicator measured the time required for pedicle screw placement. Results were presented as means ± SD. Paired samples t-test and χ2 -test were used for comparison. Furthermore, an updated review was conducted, which included studies published from 2006 onwards.
RESULTS
Baseline patient characteristics were recorded. The primary accuracy outcome revealed a 96.77% accuracy rate in the ECD group, compared to a 95.16% accuracy rate in the free-hand group, with no significant differences noted. In contrast, ECD demonstrated a significant reduction in radiation exposure frequency when compared to the free-hand group (1.11 ± 0.32 vs. 1.30 ± 0.53; p < 0.001), resulting in a 14.6% reduction. Moreover, ECD displayed a decrease of 30.38% in insertion time (70.88 ± 30.51 vs. 101.82 ± 54.00 s; p < 0.001). According to the results of the 21 studies, ECD has been utilized in various areas of the spine such as the atlas, thoracic and lumbar spine, as well as sacral 2-alar-iliac. The accuracy of ECD ranged from 85% to 100%.
CONCLUSION
The prospectively randomized trial and the review indicate that the use of ECD presents a secure and precise approach to the placement of pedicle screws, with the added benefit of reducing both procedure time and radiation exposure.
Collapse