Dataset Information

Accuracy of Pedicle Screw Placement Methods in Pediatrics and Adolescents Spinal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Study design

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Objective

Various methods of pedicle screw (PS) placement in spinal fusion surgery existed, which can be grouped into conventional freehand (FH), modified freehand (MF), and image-guided methods (including fluoroscopy-based navigation (FL), computed tomography-based navigation (CT-nav), robot-assisted (RA), and ultrasound-guided (UG)). However, the literature showed mixed findings regarding their accuracy and complications. This review aimed to discover which method of PS placement has the highest accuracy and lowest complication rate in pediatric and adolescent spinal fusion surgery.

Methods

A comprehensive search in MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE (OVID), CENTRAL, and Web of Science was conducted until May 2020 by 2 independent reviewers, followed by bias assessment with ROB 2 and ROBINS-I tools and quantification with meta-analysis. Overall evidence quality was determined with GRADE tool.

Results

Four RCTs and 2 quasi-RCTs/CCTs comprising 3,830 PS placed in 291 patients (4-22 years old) were analyzed. The lowest accuracy was found in FH (78.35%) while the highest accuracy was found in MF (95.86%). MF was more accurate than FH (OR 3.34 (95% CI, 2.33-4.79), P < .00 001, I² = 0%). Three-dimensional printed drill template (as part of MF) was more accurate than FH (OR 3.10 (95% CI, 1.98-4.86), P < .00 001, I² = 14%). Overall, complications occurred in 5.84% of the patients with 0.34% revision rate. Complication events in MF was lower compared to FH (OR 0.47 (95% CI, 0.10-2.15), P = .33, I² = 0%).

Conclusions

Meta-analysis shows that MF is more accurate than FH in pediatric and adolescent requiring PS placement for spinal fusion surgery.

SUBMITTER: De Vega B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9109561 | biostudies-literature | 2022 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Accuracy of Pedicle Screw Placement Methods in Pediatrics and Adolescents Spinal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

De Vega Brigita B Navarro Aida Ribera AR Gibson Alexander A Kalaskar Deepak M DM

Global spine journal 20210318 4

<h4>Study design</h4>Systematic review and meta-analysis.<h4>Objective</h4>Various methods of pedicle screw (PS) placement in spinal fusion surgery existed, which can be grouped into conventional freehand (FH), modified freehand (MF), and image-guided methods (including fluoroscopy-based navigation (FL), computed tomography-based navigation (CT-nav), robot-assisted (RA), and ultrasound-guided (UG)). However, the literature showed mixed findings regarding their accuracy and complications. This re ...[more]

PMID: 33733907

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveThe pedicle screw insertion technique has evolved significantly, and despite the challenges of precise placement, advancements like AR-based surgical navigation systems now offer enhanced accuracy and safety in spinal surgery by integrating real-time, high-resolution imaging with virtual models to aid surgeons. This study aims to evaluate the differences in accuracy between novel AR-guided pedicle screw insertion and conventional surgery techniques.MethodsA randomized controlled trial was conducted from March 2019 to December 2023 to compare the efficacy of AR-guided pedicle screw fixation with conventional freehand surgery using CT guidance. The study included 150 patients, aged 18-75, with 75 patients in each group. The total number of pedicle screws planned for the clinical trial placement was 351 and 348 in the experimental and control groups. The safety and efficacy of the procedures were evaluated by assessing screw placement accuracy and complication rates.ResultsIn the full analysis set (FAS) analysis, the difference in the excellent and good rates of screw placement (experimental group - control group) and 95% confidence interval was 6.3% [3.0%-9.8%], with a p value of 0.0003 for the superiority test. In the FAS sensitivity analysis, the success rate was 98.0% (344 out of 351) in the experimental group and 91.7% (319 out of 348) in the control group, with a difference and 95% confidence interval of 6.3% [2.9% and 9.8%, respectively]. In the per-protocol set (PPS) analysis, the difference in the excellent and good rates of screw placement between the experimental and control groups, and the 95% confidence interval was 6.4% [3.3%-9.5%], with a p value of 0.0001 for the superiority test. In the actual treatment set (ATS) analysis, the excellent and good rates of screw placement were 99.1% in the experimental group and 91.7% in the control group. The difference in the excellent and good rates of screw placement (experimental group - control group) and 95% confidence interval was 7.3% [4.1%-10.6%], with a p value of < 0.0001 for the superiority test.ConclusionsThe AR surgical navigation system can improve the accuracy of pedicle screw implantation and provide precise guidance for surgeons during pedicle screw insertion.

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine the rates and risk factors of pedicle screw placement accuracy and the proximal facet joint violation (FJV) using TINAVI robot-assisted technique.MethodsPatients with thoracolumbar fractures or degenerative diseases were retrospectively recruited from June 2018 and June 2020. The pedicle penetration and proximal FJV were compared in different instrumental levels to identify the safe and risk segments during insertion. Moreover, the factors were also assessed using univariate and multivariate analyses.ResultsA total of 72 patients with 332 pedicle screws were included in the current study. The optimal and clinically acceptable screw positions were 85.8% and 93.4%. Of the 332 screws concerning the intra-pedicular accuracy, 285 screws (85.8%) were evaluated as Grade A according to the Gertzbein and Robbins scale, with the remaining 25 (7.6%), 10 (3.0%), 6 (1.8%), and 6 screws (1.8%) as Grades B, C, D, and E. Moreover, in terms of the proximal FJV, 255 screws (76.8%) screws were assessed as Grade 0 according to the Babu scale, with the remaining 34 (10.3%), 22 (6.6%), and 21 screws (6.3%) as Grades 1, 2, and 3. Furthermore, the univariate analysis showed significantly higher rate of penetration for patients with age < 61 years old, sex of female, thoracolumbar insertion, shorter distance from skin to insertion point, and smaller facet angle. Meanwhile, the patients with the sex of female, BMI < 25.9, grade I spondylolisthesis, lumbosacral insertion, longer distance from skin to insertion point, and larger facet angle had a significantly higher rate of proximal FJV. The outcomes of multivariate analyses showed that sex of male (adjusted OR 0.320, 95% CI 0.140-0.732; p = 0.007), facet angle ≥ 45° (adjusted OR 0.266, 95% CI 0.090-0.786; p = 0.017), distance from skin to insertion point ≥ 4.5 cm (adjusted OR 0.342, 95% CI 0.134-0.868; p = 0.024), and lumbosacral instrumentation (adjusted OR 0.227, 95% CI 0.091-0.566; p = 0.001) were independently associated with intra-pedicular accuracy; the L5 insertion (adjusted OR 2.020, 95% CI 1.084-3.766; p = 0.027) and facet angle ≥ 45° (adjusted OR 1.839, 95% CI 1.026-3.298; p = 0.041) were independently associated with the proximal FJV.ConclusionTINAVI robot-assisted technique was associated with a high rate of pedicle screw placement and a low rate of proximal FJV. This new technique showed a safe and precise performance for pedicle screw placement in spinal surgery. Facet angle ≥ 45° is independently associated with both the intra-pedicular accuracy and proximal FJV.

Project description:Study designRetrospective Multi-Center.ObjectiveTo investigate the factors involved in, and their relative contributions to, the overall accuracy of robot-assisted pedicle screw placement.Summary of background dataRobot-assisted surgery has reportedly resulted in greater accuracy for placement of pedicle screws than conventional methods. There are many potential factors affecting the accuracy of pedicle screws placed with a robot. No study has investigated these factors in a robust way.MethodsRadiographic and clinical data of three centers were pooled. Pre- and post-operative computerized tomographies were obtained by all three centers to assess the accuracy of the placed screws. The primary outcome measured was accuracy of pedicle screws placed with the robot. The authors performed a multivariate regression analysis to determine the significant patient- and screw-related variables and their relative contribution to the overall accuracy. In addition, an ordinal regression analysis was conducted to investigate the effects of different variables on accuracy of robot-placed screws graded by Gertzbein-Robbins grading system (GRS).ResultsThe total contribution of all studied variables to overall accuracy variation as measured by offsets between the placed and planned screws was only 18%. Obesity, long constructs, female gender, surgeon, and vertebral levels were among the factors that had small contributions to the different screw offsets. For GRS grades, significant variables were gender (Log odds:0.62, 95% CI: 0.38-0.85), age (Log odds: 0.02, 95% CI: 0.01-0.03), length of constructs (Log odds: 0.07, 95% CI: 0.02-0.11), screw diameter (Log odds: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.39-0.71), and length of the screws (Log odds: 0.03, 95% CI: 0.01-0.05). However, these variables too, regardless of their significant association with the accuracy of placed screws, had little contribution to overall variability of accuracy itself (only about 7%).ConclusionThe accuracy of screws placed with robotic assistance, as graded by GRS or measured offsets between planned and placed screw trajectories, is minimally affected by different patient- or screw-related variables due to the robustness of the robotic navigation system used in this study.

Project description:This systematic review and meta-analysis investigated differences in accuracy, operation time, and radiation exposure time between robot-assisted and freehand techniques for pedicle screw insertion. Two investigators independently searched for articles on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published from 2012 to 2019. The final meta-analysis included seven RCTs. We compared the accuracy of pedicle screw placement, operation time, and radiation exposure time between robot-assisted and conventional freehand groups. Seven RCTs included 540 patients and placement of 2,476 pedicle screws, of which 1,220 were inserted using the robot-assisted technique and 1,256 were inserted using the conventional freehand technique. The pedicle screw positions were classified using the Gertzbein and Robbins classification (grade A-E). The combined results of Grade A [odds ratio (OR) =1.68; 95% confidence intervals (CI): 0.82-3.44; P=0.16), Grade A+B (OR =1.70; 95% CI: 0.47-6.13; P=0.42), and Grade C+D+E (OR =0.59; 95% CI: 0.16-2.12; P=0.42) for the accuracy rate revealed no significant difference between the two groups. Subgroup analysis results revealed that the TiRobot-assisted technique presented a significantly improved pedicle screw insertion accuracy rate compared with that of the conventional freehand technique, based on Grade A, Grade A+B, and Grade C+D+E classifications. The SpineAssist-assisted technique presented an inferior pedicle screw insertion accuracy rate compared with that of the conventional freehand technique, based on Grade A, Grade A+B, and Grade C+D+E classifications. No difference between the Renaissance-assisted and conventional freehand techniques was noted for pedicle screw insertion accuracy rates, based on both Grade A (OR =1.58; 95% CI: 0.85-2.96; P=0.15), Grade A+B (OR =2.20; 95% CI: 0.39-12.43; P=0.37), and Grade C+D+E (OR =0.45; 95% CI: 0.08-2.56; P=0.37) classifications. Regarding operation time, robot-assisted surgery had significantly longer operation time than conventional freehand surgery. The robot-assisted group had significantly shorter radiation exposure time. Regarding the pedicle screw insertion accuracy rate, the TiRobot-assisted technique was superior, the SpineAssist-assisted technique was inferior, and Renaissance was similar to the conventional freehand technique.

Project description:Ascertaining the accuracy of the pedicle screw (PS) trajectories is important as PS malpositioning can cause critical complications. We aimed to determine the angle range over which estimation is unreliable; build a low-cost PS placement support system that uses an inertial measurement unit (IMU) to enable the monitoring of surgical tools and PS trajectories, and determine the situations where IMU support would be most beneficial. In PS insertion experiments, we used cadaver samples that included lumbar porcine spines. Computed tomography images obtained before and after PS insertion were viewed. Offsets between the planned and implanted PS trajectories in the freehand and IMU-assisted groups were analyzed. The PS cortical bone breaches were classified according to the Gertzbein and Robbins criteria (GRC). Added head-down tilted sample experiments were repeated wherein we expected a decreased rostro-caudal rotational accuracy of the PS according to the angle estimation ability results. Evaluation of the PS trajectory accuracy revealed no significant advantage of IMU-assisted rostro-caudal rotational accuracy versus freehand accuracy. According to the GRC, IMU assistance significantly increased the rate of clinically acceptable PS positions (RoCA) than the freehand technique. In the head-down tilted sample experiments, IMU assist provided increased accuracies with both rostro-caudal and medial rotational techniques when compared with the freehand technique. In the freehand group, RoCA was significantly decreased in samples with rostral tilting relative to that in the samples without. However, In the IMU-assisted group, no significant difference in RoCA between the samples with and without head-down tilting was observed. Even when the planned PS medial and/or rostro-caudal rotational angle was relatively large and difficult to reproduce manually, IMU-support helped maintain the PS trajectory accuracy and positioning safety. IMU assist in PS placement was more beneficial, especially for larger rostro-caudal and/or medial rotational pedicle angles.

Dataset Information

Accuracy of Pedicle Screw Placement Methods in Pediatrics and Adolescents Spinal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Study design

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Accuracy of Pedicle Screw Placement Methods in Pediatrics and Adolescents Spinal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets