Claudio Lamartina1, Riccardo Cecchinato2, Zsolt Fekete3, Alberto Lipari4, Meinrad Fiechter4, P Berjano1. 1. IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan, Italy. 2. IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan, Italy. dott.cecchinato@gmail.com. 3. Neuro und Wirbelsäulenzentrum Zentralschweiz, Lucerne, Switzerland. 4. Medacta International SA, 6874, Castel San Pietro, Switzerland.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Pedicle screw placement is an increasingly common procedure for the correction of spine degenerative disease, deformity and trauma. However, screw placement is demanding, with complications resulting from inaccurate screw placement. While several different techniques have been developed to improve accuracy, they all have their limitations. METHODS: We examined the MySpine (Medacta International SA, Castel San Pietro, CH) patient-matched pedicle targeting guide in three cadaveric spine specimens operated on by three surgeons. A three-dimensional (3D) preoperative plan was constructed from spinal computed tomography scans, from which individualised guides were developed for the placement of Medacta Unconstrained Screw Technology pedicle screws. Following screw placement, the 3D positioning of the screws was compared to the preoperative plan against a series of pre-defined criteria. RESULTS: Of 46 inserted screws eligible for assessment, 91.3 % were fully inside the pedicle. There were no cases of Grade B (2-4 mm) or C (>4 mm) pedicle perforation. The mean deviation between the planned and actual screw position at the midpoint of the pedicle was 0.70 mm, the mean horizontal deviation was 0.60 mm and the mean vertical deviation was 0.77 mm. The mean angular deviation in the sagittal plane was 1.74°, versus 1.32° in the transverse plane. The mean deviation in screw depth was 1.55 mm. On all measures, the accuracy of screw placement was within the predefined criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Our cadaver study indicates that pedicle screw placement with the system is accurate and should be investigated in larger in vitro and in vivo studies.
PURPOSE: Pedicle screw placement is an increasingly common procedure for the correction of spine degenerative disease, deformity and trauma. However, screw placement is demanding, with complications resulting from inaccurate screw placement. While several different techniques have been developed to improve accuracy, they all have their limitations. METHODS: We examined the MySpine (Medacta International SA, Castel San Pietro, CH) patient-matched pedicle targeting guide in three cadaveric spine specimens operated on by three surgeons. A three-dimensional (3D) preoperative plan was constructed from spinal computed tomography scans, from which individualised guides were developed for the placement of Medacta Unconstrained Screw Technology pedicle screws. Following screw placement, the 3D positioning of the screws was compared to the preoperative plan against a series of pre-defined criteria. RESULTS: Of 46 inserted screws eligible for assessment, 91.3 % were fully inside the pedicle. There were no cases of Grade B (2-4 mm) or C (>4 mm) pedicle perforation. The mean deviation between the planned and actual screw position at the midpoint of the pedicle was 0.70 mm, the mean horizontal deviation was 0.60 mm and the mean vertical deviation was 0.77 mm. The mean angular deviation in the sagittal plane was 1.74°, versus 1.32° in the transverse plane. The mean deviation in screw depth was 1.55 mm. On all measures, the accuracy of screw placement was within the predefined criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Our cadaver study indicates that pedicle screw placement with the system is accurate and should be investigated in larger in vitro and in vivo studies.
Entities:
Keywords:
Patient-specific instrumentation; Pedicle screws; Spine; Surgery; Technique, in vitro
Authors: Alexander Mason; Renee Paulsen; Jason M Babuska; Sharad Rajpal; Sigita Burneikiene; E Lee Nelson; Alan T Villavicencio Journal: J Neurosurg Spine Date: 2013-12-20
Authors: Ioannis D Gelalis; Nikolaos K Paschos; Emilios E Pakos; Angelos N Politis; Christina M Arnaoutoglou; Athanasios C Karageorgos; Avraam Ploumis; Theodoros A Xenakis Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2011-09-07 Impact factor: 3.134