Literature DB >> 29667139

Spinal navigation for minimally invasive thoracic and lumbosacral spine fixation: implications for radiation exposure, operative time, and accuracy of pedicle screw placement.

T Tajsic1, K Patel2, R Farmer3, R J Mannion2, R A Trivedi2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Navigation is emerging as a useful adjunct in percutaneous, minimally invasive spinal surgery (MIS). The aim of this study was to compare C-Arm navigated, O-Arm navigated and conventional 2D-fluoroscopy assisted MIS thoracic and lumbosacral spine fixation techniques in terms of operating time, radiation exposure and accuracy of pedicle screw (PS) placement.
METHODS: Retrospective observational study of 152 consecutive adults who underwent MIS fixations for spinal instability: 96 2D-fluoroscopy assisted, 39 3D-C-Arm navigated and 27 using O-Arm navigated.
RESULTS: O-Arm navigation significantly reduced PS misplacement (1.23%, p) compared to 3D-C-Arm navigation (7.29%, p = 0.0082) and 2D-fluoro guided placement (5.16%, p = 0379). 3D-C-Arm navigation was associated with lower procedural radiation exposure of the patient (0.4 mSv) than O-Arm navigation (3.24 mSv) or 2D-fluoro guidance (1.5 mSv). Operative time was comparable between three modalities.
CONCLUSIONS: O-Arm navigation provides greater accuracy of percutaneous instrumentation placement with an acceptable procedural radiation dose delivered to the patients and comparable operative times. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary material.

Entities:  

Keywords:  2D fluoroscopy; 3D fluoroscopy; C-Arm; Minimally invasive (MIS) spinal fixation; O-Arm; Spinal navigation

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29667139     DOI: 10.1007/s00586-018-5587-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Spine J        ISSN: 0940-6719            Impact factor:   3.134


  19 in total

1.  Patient and surgeon radiation exposure during spinal instrumentation using intraoperative computed tomography-based navigation.

Authors:  Daniel Mendelsohn; Jason Strelzow; Nicolas Dea; Nancy L Ford; Juliet Batke; Andrew Pennington; Kaiyun Yang; Tamir Ailon; Michael Boyd; Marcel Dvorak; Brian Kwon; Scott Paquette; Charles Fisher; John Street
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2015-12-10       Impact factor: 4.166

Review 2.  The accuracy of pedicle screw placement using intraoperative image guidance systems.

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

3.  Routine spinal navigation for thoraco-lumbar pedicle screw insertion using the O-arm three-dimensional imaging system improves placement accuracy.

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

Review 4.  Methods to determine pedicle screw placement accuracy in spine surgery: a systematic review.

Authors:  Ahmed A Aoude; Maryse Fortin; Rainer Figueiredo; Peter Jarzem; Jean Ouellet; Michael H Weber
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-03-07       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 5.  Accuracy of pedicle screw placement: a systematic review of prospective in vivo studies comparing free hand, fluoroscopy guidance and navigation techniques.

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

6.  Accuracy of pedicle screw placement in the lumbosacral spine using conventional technique: computed tomography postoperative assessment in 102 consecutive patients.

Authors:  Vincenzo Amato; Luigi Giannachi; Claudio Irace; Claudio Corona
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2010-03

7.  Computed tomography-based image-guided system in spinal surgery: state of the art through 10 years of experience.

Authors:  Francesco Costa; Gianluigi Dorelli; Alessandro Ortolina; Andrea Cardia; Luca Attuati; Massimo Tomei; Davide Milani; Luca Balzarini; Fabio Galbusera; Emanuela Morenghi; Maurizio Fornari
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 4.654

Review 8.  Comparative outcomes of minimally invasive surgery for posterior lumbar fusion: a systematic review.

Authors:  Christina L Goldstein; Kevin Macwan; Kala Sundararajan; Y Raja Rampersaud
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  Use of navigation-assisted fluoroscopy to decrease radiation exposure during minimally invasive spine surgery.

Authors:  Choll W Kim; Yu-Po Lee; William Taylor; Ahmet Oygar; Woo Kyung Kim
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2007-02-20       Impact factor: 4.166

10.  Improved Accuracy of Minimally Invasive Transpedicular Screw Placement in the Lumbar Spine With 3-Dimensional Stereotactic Image Guidance: A Comparative Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Austin C Bourgeois; Austin R Faulkner; Yong C Bradley; Alexander S Pasciak; Patrick B Barlow; Judson R Gash; William S Reid
Journal:  J Spinal Disord Tech       Date:  2015-11
View more
  16 in total

1.  Transfacet screws using spinal navigation in addition to anterior or oblique lumbar interbody fusion: technical note and preliminary results.

Authors:  Antoine Gennari; Amandine Gavotto; Fabien Almairac; Yann Pelletier; Philippe Paquis; Stéphane Litrico
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2021-02-01

Review 2.  Current state of minimally invasive spine surgery.

Authors:  Avani S Vaishnav; Yahya A Othman; Sohrab S Virk; Catherine Himo Gang; Sheeraz A Qureshi
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2019-06

3.  The cement leakage in cement-augmented pedicle screw instrumentation in degenerative lumbosacral diseases: a retrospective analysis of 202 cases and 950 augmented pedicle screws.

Authors:  Hui-Zhi Guo; Yong-Chao Tang; Dan-Qing Guo; Shun-Cong Zhang; Yong-Xian Li; Guo-Ye Mo; Pei-Jie Luo; Ten-Peng Zhou; Yan-Huai Ma; Xiao-Bing Jiang
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2019-04-27       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  Vertebrae segmentation in reduced radiation CT imaging for augmented reality applications.

Authors:  Ethan Schonfeld; Madeleine de Lotbiniere-Bassett; Tatiana Jansen; Diana Anthony; Anand Veeravagu
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2022-01-13       Impact factor: 2.924

5.  Lateral mass screw placement in the atlas: description of a novel surgical technique, radiographic parameters, and review of the literature.

Authors:  Bilal B Butt; Paul Gagnet; Joshua Piche; Rakesh Patel; Paul Park; Ilyas S Aleem
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2021-09

6.  Multimodal Applications of 3D-Navigation in Single-Level Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Impacts on Precision, Accuracy, Complications, and Radiation Exposure.

Authors:  Arvind G Kulkarni; Pritem A Rajamani; Sandeep Tapashetti; Tushar Sathish Kunder
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2022-07-14

7.  Comparison of three imaging and navigation systems regarding accuracy of pedicle screw placement in a sawbone model.

Authors:  Nils Beisemann; Jula Gierse; Eric Mandelka; Frank Hassel; Paul A Grützner; Jochen Franke; Sven Y Vetter
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-07-19       Impact factor: 4.996

8.  Defining the MIS-TLIF: A Systematic Review of Techniques and Technologies Used by Surgeons Worldwide.

Authors:  Sara Lener; Christoph Wipplinger; R Nick Hernandez; Ibrahim Hussain; Sertac Kirnaz; Rodrigo Navarro-Ramirez; Franziska Anna Schmidt; Eliana Kim; Roger Härtl
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2020-05-28

9.  The Navigated Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Accuracy Rate, Effect on Surgical Time, and Complications.

Authors:  Zhuo Xi; Dean Chou; Praveen V Mummaneni; Shane Burch
Journal:  Neurospine       Date:  2020-02-05

10.  A novel computer navigation model guided unilateral percutaneous vertebroplasty for vertebral compression fracture: A case report.

Authors:  Hao-Tian Xu; Shuang Zheng; Ming-Yang Kang; Tong Yu; Jian-Wu Zhao
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2020-10-30       Impact factor: 1.817

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.