Literature DB >> 14589267

Anatomic consideration for standard and modified techniques of cervical lateral mass screw placement.

Andrew A Merola1, B Andrew Castro, Paul R Alongi, Sameer Mathur, Mario Brkaric, Franco Vigna, Joseph P Riina, John Gorup, Thomas R Haher.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Posterior screw placement techniques have been previously described. Each technique differs with respect to starting point, lateral angulation and sagittal orientation.
PURPOSE: To examine the potential for injury to critical anatomic structures, such as nerve roots and vertebral arteries, during posterior cervical screw placement and to determine safe screw placement. STUDY DESIGN/
SETTING: An anatomic study was conducted to determine the optimal screw angulation for posterior cervical lateral mass screws. SPECIMEN SAMPLE: Ten fresh-frozen human cadaveric cervical spine specimens were used, consisting of four females and six males, ranging in age from 32 to 68 years. OUTCOME MEASURES: Angular measurements and distance from nerve root and vertebral arteries were measured with a single caliper and recorded. One millimeter of proximity to a vital structure was considered a violation of that structure.
METHODS: Ten fresh-frozen human cadaveric cervical spine specimens were instrumented from C2 to C7 by a single surgeon. Kirschner wires (2.0 mm) were used to reproduce the Roy-Camille, Anderson and Magerl screw trajectories. The wire was drilled through each lateral mass, simulating overdrill error. Each technique was instrumented according to the original description and with additional modifications. The modification consisted of varying the angle of screw placement in the axial plane of the original description from 0 to 30 degrees. Distances to the closest neurovascular structures were averaged for all assays.
RESULTS: The Magerl technique is safe at the standard position and modified positions of 20 degrees and 30 degrees from C3-C6. The Roy-Camille technique frequently violates neurovascular structures below C3, especially the nerve root with more lateral screw angulation. The standard technique is noted to have good bone purchase only at C2 and C3. The Anderson technique is safe at 20 degrees and 30 degrees modified positions from C3-C7. Posterior screw placement at the C7 vertebral level was safe only with a modified Anderson technique of 20 degrees and 30 degrees of lateral screw angulation.
CONCLUSIONS: The present study indicates that there are significant differences of potential neurovascular injury, which is dependent on the technique used for screw entry, the level instrumented and the angle of screw trajectory in the parasagittal plane.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 14589267     DOI: 10.1016/s1529-9430(02)00461-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine J        ISSN: 1529-9430            Impact factor:   4.166


  10 in total

1.  Freehand determination of the trajectory angle for cervical lateral mass screws: how accurate is it?

Authors:  Debasish Pal; Edward Bayley; Sani A Magaji; Bronek M Boszczyk
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-01-29       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 2.  Cervical laminectomy and instrumented lateral mass fusion: techniques, pearls and pitfalls.

Authors:  Michael Mayer; Oliver Meier; Alexander Auffarth; Heiko Koller
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2013-05-29       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  The ipsilateral lamina-pedicle angle: can it be used to guide pedicle screw placement in the sub-axial cervical spine?

Authors:  Edward Bayley; Zergham Zia; Robert Kerslake; Bronek M Boszczyk
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2009-09-01       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  A computed tomography-based anatomic comparison of three different types of c7 posterior fixation techniques : pedicle, intralaminar, and lateral mass screws.

Authors:  Woo Young Jang; Il Sup Kim; Ho Jin Lee; Jae Hoon Sung; Sang Won Lee; Jae Taek Hong
Journal:  J Korean Neurosurg Soc       Date:  2011-09-30

5.  Proposal for a new trajectory for subaxial cervical lateral mass screws.

Authors:  Samer Amhaz-Escanlar; Alberto Jorge-Mora; Teresa Jorge-Mora; Manuel Febrero-Bande; Maximo-Alberto Diez-Ulloa
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2018-06-20       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  Lamina-guided lateral mass screw placement in the sub-axial cervical spine.

Authors:  Edward Bayley; Zergham Zia; Robert Kerslake; Zdenek Klezl; Bronek M Boszczyk
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2009-12-01       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  Radiological assessment of cervical lateral mass screw angulations in Asian patients.

Authors:  Mariapan Sureisen; Lim Beng Saw; Chris Yin Wei Chan; Deepak Ajit Singh; Mun-Keong Kwan
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 1.251

8.  Lateral mass fixation in subaxial cervical spine: anatomic review.

Authors:  Elrahmany Mohamed; Zidan Ihab; Anwar Moaz; Nabawi Ayman; Abo-Elw Haitham
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2012-03

9.  Four lateral mass screw fixation techniques in lower cervical spine following laminectomy: a finite element analysis study of stress distribution.

Authors:  Mingzhi Song; Zhen Zhang; Ming Lu; Junwei Zong; Chao Dong; Kai Ma; Shouyu Wang
Journal:  Biomed Eng Online       Date:  2014-08-09       Impact factor: 2.819

10.  Use of 3D Navigation in Subaxial Cervical Spine Lateral Mass Screw Insertion.

Authors:  Abdullah Arab; Fahad Alkherayf; Adam Sachs; Eugene K Wai
Journal:  J Neurol Surg Rep       Date:  2018-02-19
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.