Mengran Jin1,2, Zhen Liu2, Yong Qiu2, Huang Yan2, Xiao Han2, Zezhang Zhu3. 1. Department of Orthopaedics, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province, China. 2. Department of Spine Surgery, Drum Tower Hospital of Nanjing University Medical School, Zhongshan Road, No. 321, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, 210008, China. 3. Department of Spine Surgery, Drum Tower Hospital of Nanjing University Medical School, Zhongshan Road, No. 321, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, 210008, China. drzhuzhezhang@126.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the accuracy of O-arm-navigation-based pedicle screw placement in scoliosis surgery and identify the potential risk factors for the misplacement of pedicle screws. METHODS: One hundred forty four scoliosis patients treated with O-arm-navigation-based pedicle screw instrumentation were enrolled, and 1145 pedicle screws implanted in the apical region of the curves were retrospectively reviewed for accuracy according to post-operative CT images. The potential risk factors and independent predictive factor(s) for the misplaced screws were identified statistically. RESULTS: The overall malpositioning rate of pedicle screw was 9.8%; 54.5% of which were misplaced laterally. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis of clinical and surgical treatment variables indicated that patients with congenital scoliosis (CS) [OR: 1.489 (95% CI: 1.002-2.213; P = 0.035)] and neurofibromatosis type I (NF-1) [OR: 1.785 (95% CI: 1267-2.045; P = 0.026)], middle-thoracic spine [OR: 1.661 (95% CI: 1.107-2.481; P = 0.021)], the concave pedicles [OR: 1.527 (95% CI: 1.020-2.285; P = 0.019)], and the segments three levels away from the tracker [OR: 3.522 (95% CI: 2.357-5.263; P = 0.001)] were independently associated with pedicle screw misplacement. CONCLUSION: O-arm-assisted navigation does improve the accuracy and safety of pedicle screw placement in scoliosis surgery. However, unavoidable screw malpositioning remained, which occurred significantly more often in patients with CS and NF-1, in middle-thoracic spine, in the concave pedicles, and in the segments three levels away from the tracker.
PURPOSE: To assess the accuracy of O-arm-navigation-based pedicle screw placement in scoliosis surgery and identify the potential risk factors for the misplacement of pedicle screws. METHODS: One hundred forty four scoliosispatients treated with O-arm-navigation-based pedicle screw instrumentation were enrolled, and 1145 pedicle screws implanted in the apical region of the curves were retrospectively reviewed for accuracy according to post-operative CT images. The potential risk factors and independent predictive factor(s) for the misplaced screws were identified statistically. RESULTS: The overall malpositioning rate of pedicle screw was 9.8%; 54.5% of which were misplaced laterally. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis of clinical and surgical treatment variables indicated that patients with congenital scoliosis (CS) [OR: 1.489 (95% CI: 1.002-2.213; P = 0.035)] and neurofibromatosis type I (NF-1) [OR: 1.785 (95% CI: 1267-2.045; P = 0.026)], middle-thoracic spine [OR: 1.661 (95% CI: 1.107-2.481; P = 0.021)], the concave pedicles [OR: 1.527 (95% CI: 1.020-2.285; P = 0.019)], and the segments three levels away from the tracker [OR: 3.522 (95% CI: 2.357-5.263; P = 0.001)] were independently associated with pedicle screw misplacement. CONCLUSION: O-arm-assisted navigation does improve the accuracy and safety of pedicle screw placement in scoliosis surgery. However, unavoidable screw malpositioning remained, which occurred significantly more often in patients with CS and NF-1, in middle-thoracic spine, in the concave pedicles, and in the segments three levels away from the tracker.
Authors: Ji Min Ling; Shree Kumar Dinesh; Boon Chuan Pang; Min Wei Chen; Heng Lip Lim; Danny T Louange; Chun Sing Yu; Chee Meng Ernest Wang Journal: J Clin Neurosci Date: 2013-10-03 Impact factor: 1.961
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
Authors: A R Vaccaro; S J Rizzolo; T J Allardyce; M Ramsey; J Salvo; R A Balderston; J M Cotler Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 1995-08 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Benjamin Phak Boon Tow; Wai Mun Yue; Abhishek Srivastava; Jenn Ming Lai; Chang Ming Guo; Benedict Chan Wearn Peng; John L T Chen; Andy K S Yew; Chusheng Seng; Seang Beng Tan Journal: J Spinal Disord Tech Date: 2015-10
Authors: Andrew Hersh; Smruti Mahapatra; Carly Weber-Levine; Tolulope Awosika; John N Theodore; Hesham M Zakaria; Ann Liu; Timothy F Witham; Nicholas Theodore Journal: HSS J Date: 2021-07-14
Authors: Francesca Manni; Adrian Elmi-Terander; Gustav Burström; Oscar Persson; Erik Edström; Ronald Holthuizen; Caifeng Shan; Svitlana Zinger; Fons van der Sommen; Peter H N de With Journal: Sensors (Basel) Date: 2020-06-29 Impact factor: 3.576
Authors: Adrian Elmi-Terander; Gustav Burström; Rami Nachabe; Halldor Skulason; Kyrre Pedersen; Michael Fagerlund; Fredrik Ståhl; Anastasios Charalampidis; Michael Söderman; Staffan Holmin; Drazenko Babic; Inge Jenniskens; Erik Edström; Paul Gerdhem Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2019-04-01 Impact factor: 3.241