Literature DB >> 21289565

Posterior C2 instrumentation: accuracy and complications associated with four techniques.

Richard J Bransford1, Anthony J Russo, Mark Freeborn, Quynh T Nguyen, Michael J Lee, Jens R Chapman, Carlo Bellabarba.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: Retrospective review of a single tertiary care spine database to identify patients with C2 instrumentation between January 2001 and September 2008.
OBJECTIVE: (1) Evaluate a large series of posterior C2 screws to determine accuracy by computed tomography (CT) scan, (2) assess dimensions of "safe bony windows" with CT, and (3) assess perioperative complication rate related to errant screw placement. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The variable C2 anatomy can make instrumentation challenging and prone to potentially severe complications. New techniques have expanded available options.
METHODS: Clinical data were obtained from the medical record. Radiographic analyses included preoperative and postoperative CT scans to quantify the patients' bone and to classify accuracy of instrumentation. Screws were graded using the following definitions:
RESULTS: Seven hundred and thirty-six screws in 383 patients were identified. Fifty-five patients were excluded because of lack of data leaving 328 patients (188 male patients, 140 female patients) with 633 screws. Three hundred and thirty-nine pedicle, 154 transarticular, 63 laminar, and 77 short pars screws were placed, and of the 509 screws with postoperative CT scans, accuracy rates (Types I and II) were 98.8%, 98.5%, 100%, and 94.6%, respectively. Eight were unacceptably placed: two medially and six encroaching on the vertebral artery foramen. One patient had a vertebral artery occlusion and another had a dissection. There were no neurologic injuries. Mean CT measurements of pedicle height, axial width, and laminar width were 8.1, 5.8, and 5.7 mm respectively, with males having significantly larger pedicle height (P<0.001), pedicle width (P<0.001), and laminar width (P<0.022).
CONCLUSION: We show a lower than previously reported incidence of complications associated with posterior C2 screw placement. The multiple techniques of posterior C2 fixation available allow for flexibility in determining ideal technique.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21289565     DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181fdaf06

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  17 in total

Review 1.  Use of intraoperative fluoroscopy for the safe placement of C2 laminar screws: technical note.

Authors:  John A Engler; Michael L Smith
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-08-05       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Computed tomography-based classification of axis vertebra: choice of screw placement.

Authors:  Nupur Pruthi; Rose Dawn; Yogitha Ravindranath; Tanmoy Kumar Maiti; Roopa Ravindranath; Mariamma Philip
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-02-23       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 3.  Cervical screw placement using rapid prototyping drill templates for navigation: a literature review.

Authors:  Teng Lu; Chao Liu; Jun Dong; Meng Lu; Haopeng Li; Xijing He
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2016-05-09       Impact factor: 2.924

Review 4.  Anatomical considerations of C2 lamina for the placement of translaminar screw: a review of the literature.

Authors:  D Chytas; D S Korres; G C Babis; N E Efstathopoulos; E C Papadopoulos; K Markatos; V S Nikolaou
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2017-11-08

5.  Deviation analysis of C2 translaminar screw placement assisted by a novel rapid prototyping drill template: a cadaveric study.

Authors:  Yong Hu; Zhen-shan Yuan; William Ryan Spiker; Todd J Albert; Wei-xin Dong; Hui Xie; Jian-bing Yuan; Cheng-tao Wang
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2013-09-05       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  Development of a surgical navigation system based on 3D Slicer for intraoperative implant placement surgery.

Authors:  Xiaojun Chen; Lu Xu; Huixiang Wang; Fang Wang; Qiugen Wang; Ron Kikinis
Journal:  Med Eng Phys       Date:  2017-01-18       Impact factor: 2.242

7.  Morphological and clinical feasibility of C3 pedicle screw instrumentation in patients with congenital C2-3 fusion.

Authors:  Peng Xiu; Qing Wang; Gaoju Wang; Song Wang; Guidong Dai; Yongshu Lan
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-06-04       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  Radiographic and clinical assessment on the accuracy and complications of C1 anterior lateral mass and C2 anterior pedicle screw placement in the TARP-III procedure: a study of 106 patients.

Authors:  Xueshi Li; Fuzhi Ai; Hong Xia; Zenghui Wu; Xiangyang Ma; Qingshui Yin
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-05-17       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  C1-C2 fusion: postoperative C2 nerve impingement-is it a problem?

Authors:  Kurt D Myers; Emily M Lindley; Evalina L Burger; Vikas V Patel
Journal:  Evid Based Spine Care J       Date:  2012-02

10.  Bilateral Pedicle and Crossed Translaminar Screws in C2.

Authors:  Daniel Mendelsohn; Nicolas Dea; Robert Lee; Michael C Boyd
Journal:  Asian Spine J       Date:  2015-09-22
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.