Cargando…

Accuracy of Pedicle Screw Placement Comparing an Electronic Conductivity Device and a Multi-axis Angiography Unit with C-arm Fluoroscopy in Lumbar Fixation Surgery for Safety

The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy, safety, and usefulness of percutaneous pedicle screw (PPS) placement for lumbar fixation using a multi-axis angiography unit (MAU) and an electronic conductivity device (ECD) with a cannulated Jamshidi needle with that using a conventional C-arm. Of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: KAGEYAMA, Hiroto, YOSHIMURA, Shinichi, TATEBAYASHI, Kotaro, IIDA, Tomoko, YAMADA, Kiyofumi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Japan Neurosurgical Society 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8120099/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33790131
http://dx.doi.org/10.2176/nmc.oa.2020-0374
_version_ 1783691983398633472
author KAGEYAMA, Hiroto
YOSHIMURA, Shinichi
TATEBAYASHI, Kotaro
IIDA, Tomoko
YAMADA, Kiyofumi
author_facet KAGEYAMA, Hiroto
YOSHIMURA, Shinichi
TATEBAYASHI, Kotaro
IIDA, Tomoko
YAMADA, Kiyofumi
author_sort KAGEYAMA, Hiroto
collection PubMed
description The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy, safety, and usefulness of percutaneous pedicle screw (PPS) placement for lumbar fixation using a multi-axis angiography unit (MAU) and an electronic conductivity device (ECD) with a cannulated Jamshidi needle with that using a conventional C-arm. Of 65 cases that underwent lumbar fixation (region between L1-S1) during April 2013 to March 2019, 57 cases that could be followed-up for more than 12 months after the procedure were included. Among them, 31 patients (150 screws) received treatment with MAU and ECD (MAU+ECD group) and 26 (117 screws) were treated with the conventional C-arm. We performed a retrospective study of the surgical techniques used in each group at our institute by assessing the accuracy of PPS using Gertzbin–Robbins classification and the Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score for recovery. There was no significant difference in surgery outcome based on the JOA recovery rate. There was a significant difference between the two groups in terms of Accuracy-1 (Group A indicating accuracy and Groups B–E indicating inaccuracy), where the rates were 85.3% and 72.0% in the MAU+ECD group and C-arm group, respectively (P = 0.008). There was also a significant difference between the two groups in terms of Accuracy-2 (Groups A–B indicating accuracy; Groups C–E indicate inaccuracy), where the rates were 98.0% and 92.4% in the MAU+ECD and C-arm groups, respectively (P = 0.036). A combination of MAU and ECD is a safe and accurate method for inserting screws into the pedicle.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8120099
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher The Japan Neurosurgical Society
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-81200992021-05-18 Accuracy of Pedicle Screw Placement Comparing an Electronic Conductivity Device and a Multi-axis Angiography Unit with C-arm Fluoroscopy in Lumbar Fixation Surgery for Safety KAGEYAMA, Hiroto YOSHIMURA, Shinichi TATEBAYASHI, Kotaro IIDA, Tomoko YAMADA, Kiyofumi Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo) Original Article The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy, safety, and usefulness of percutaneous pedicle screw (PPS) placement for lumbar fixation using a multi-axis angiography unit (MAU) and an electronic conductivity device (ECD) with a cannulated Jamshidi needle with that using a conventional C-arm. Of 65 cases that underwent lumbar fixation (region between L1-S1) during April 2013 to March 2019, 57 cases that could be followed-up for more than 12 months after the procedure were included. Among them, 31 patients (150 screws) received treatment with MAU and ECD (MAU+ECD group) and 26 (117 screws) were treated with the conventional C-arm. We performed a retrospective study of the surgical techniques used in each group at our institute by assessing the accuracy of PPS using Gertzbin–Robbins classification and the Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score for recovery. There was no significant difference in surgery outcome based on the JOA recovery rate. There was a significant difference between the two groups in terms of Accuracy-1 (Group A indicating accuracy and Groups B–E indicating inaccuracy), where the rates were 85.3% and 72.0% in the MAU+ECD group and C-arm group, respectively (P = 0.008). There was also a significant difference between the two groups in terms of Accuracy-2 (Groups A–B indicating accuracy; Groups C–E indicate inaccuracy), where the rates were 98.0% and 92.4% in the MAU+ECD and C-arm groups, respectively (P = 0.036). A combination of MAU and ECD is a safe and accurate method for inserting screws into the pedicle. The Japan Neurosurgical Society 2021-05 2021-03-31 /pmc/articles/PMC8120099/ /pubmed/33790131 http://dx.doi.org/10.2176/nmc.oa.2020-0374 Text en © 2021 The Japan Neurosurgical Society https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
spellingShingle Original Article
KAGEYAMA, Hiroto
YOSHIMURA, Shinichi
TATEBAYASHI, Kotaro
IIDA, Tomoko
YAMADA, Kiyofumi
Accuracy of Pedicle Screw Placement Comparing an Electronic Conductivity Device and a Multi-axis Angiography Unit with C-arm Fluoroscopy in Lumbar Fixation Surgery for Safety
title Accuracy of Pedicle Screw Placement Comparing an Electronic Conductivity Device and a Multi-axis Angiography Unit with C-arm Fluoroscopy in Lumbar Fixation Surgery for Safety
title_full Accuracy of Pedicle Screw Placement Comparing an Electronic Conductivity Device and a Multi-axis Angiography Unit with C-arm Fluoroscopy in Lumbar Fixation Surgery for Safety
title_fullStr Accuracy of Pedicle Screw Placement Comparing an Electronic Conductivity Device and a Multi-axis Angiography Unit with C-arm Fluoroscopy in Lumbar Fixation Surgery for Safety
title_full_unstemmed Accuracy of Pedicle Screw Placement Comparing an Electronic Conductivity Device and a Multi-axis Angiography Unit with C-arm Fluoroscopy in Lumbar Fixation Surgery for Safety
title_short Accuracy of Pedicle Screw Placement Comparing an Electronic Conductivity Device and a Multi-axis Angiography Unit with C-arm Fluoroscopy in Lumbar Fixation Surgery for Safety
title_sort accuracy of pedicle screw placement comparing an electronic conductivity device and a multi-axis angiography unit with c-arm fluoroscopy in lumbar fixation surgery for safety
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8120099/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33790131
http://dx.doi.org/10.2176/nmc.oa.2020-0374
work_keys_str_mv AT kageyamahiroto accuracyofpediclescrewplacementcomparinganelectronicconductivitydeviceandamultiaxisangiographyunitwithcarmfluoroscopyinlumbarfixationsurgeryforsafety
AT yoshimurashinichi accuracyofpediclescrewplacementcomparinganelectronicconductivitydeviceandamultiaxisangiographyunitwithcarmfluoroscopyinlumbarfixationsurgeryforsafety
AT tatebayashikotaro accuracyofpediclescrewplacementcomparinganelectronicconductivitydeviceandamultiaxisangiographyunitwithcarmfluoroscopyinlumbarfixationsurgeryforsafety
AT iidatomoko accuracyofpediclescrewplacementcomparinganelectronicconductivitydeviceandamultiaxisangiographyunitwithcarmfluoroscopyinlumbarfixationsurgeryforsafety
AT yamadakiyofumi accuracyofpediclescrewplacementcomparinganelectronicconductivitydeviceandamultiaxisangiographyunitwithcarmfluoroscopyinlumbarfixationsurgeryforsafety