Intraoperative Computed Tomography Versus 3D C-Arm Imaging for Navigated Spinal Instrumentation

Intraoperative Computed Tomography Versus 3D C-Arm Imaging for Navigated Spinal Instrumentation Study Design.A prospective case-series study and a retrospective analysis of historical patients for comparison of data.Objective.To compare accuracy and limitations of intraoperative computed tomography (iCT)- versus 3D C-arm–based spinal navigation for posterior pedicle screw implantation.Summary of Background Data.Despite the higher accuracy of navigated compared to non-navigated pedicle screw implantation, it remains a matter of debate whether the use of iCT imaging may further benefit navigated spinal instrumentation compared to more commonly used isocentric 3D C-arm imaging.Methods.Between 2013 and 2016, 1527 pedicle screws were implanted in 260 patients with iCT (1219 screws) or 3D C-arm (308 screws)–based spinal navigation. Screw positioning was intraoperatively assessed by a second iCT or 3D C-arm (intraoperative accuracy). If necessary, immediate intraoperative screw revision was performed. Thereafter, a third iCT or 3D C-arm scan was performed to confirm repositioning (final accuracy). Clinical and patient data, intraoperative screw assessability, and accuracy rates were retrospectively reviewed and analyzed by an independent observer.Results.Intraoperative CT permitted immediate intraoperative assessment of each implanted screw. In contrast, 39 of the screws visualized with 3D C-arm imaging were intraoperatively not clearly assessable. Regarding the overall precision, iCT and 3D C-arm navigation yielded a comparable intraoperative accuracy (iCT 94.7% vs 3D C-arm 89.4%) and immediate correction of misplaced screws was feasible with both modalities (final accuracy: iCT 95.4% vs 3D C-arm 91.6%). Regarding the region specific performance, however, iCT-based navigation yielded significantly higher final accuracy rates in the cervical (iCT 99.5% vs 3D C-arm 88.9%, ∗P < 0.01) and thoracic (iCT 97.7% vs 3D C-arm 88.8%, ∗P < 0.001) regions.Conclusion.Both iCT and 3D C-arm–based spinal navigation provides high pedicle screw accuracy rates. Immediate screw assessability and placement accuracy in the cervical-thoracic spine, however, appear to be limited with intraoperative 3D C-arm imaging alone.Level of Evidence: 3 http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Spine Wolters Kluwer Health

Intraoperative Computed Tomography Versus 3D C-Arm Imaging for Navigated Spinal Instrumentation

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wolters_kluwer/intraoperative-computed-tomography-versus-3d-c-arm-imaging-for-DqboQTMUJV
Publisher
Wolters Kluwer
Copyright
Copyright © 2018 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
ISSN
0362-2436
eISSN
1528-1159
D.O.I.
10.1097/BRS.0000000000002173
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Study Design.A prospective case-series study and a retrospective analysis of historical patients for comparison of data.Objective.To compare accuracy and limitations of intraoperative computed tomography (iCT)- versus 3D C-arm–based spinal navigation for posterior pedicle screw implantation.Summary of Background Data.Despite the higher accuracy of navigated compared to non-navigated pedicle screw implantation, it remains a matter of debate whether the use of iCT imaging may further benefit navigated spinal instrumentation compared to more commonly used isocentric 3D C-arm imaging.Methods.Between 2013 and 2016, 1527 pedicle screws were implanted in 260 patients with iCT (1219 screws) or 3D C-arm (308 screws)–based spinal navigation. Screw positioning was intraoperatively assessed by a second iCT or 3D C-arm (intraoperative accuracy). If necessary, immediate intraoperative screw revision was performed. Thereafter, a third iCT or 3D C-arm scan was performed to confirm repositioning (final accuracy). Clinical and patient data, intraoperative screw assessability, and accuracy rates were retrospectively reviewed and analyzed by an independent observer.Results.Intraoperative CT permitted immediate intraoperative assessment of each implanted screw. In contrast, 39 of the screws visualized with 3D C-arm imaging were intraoperatively not clearly assessable. Regarding the overall precision, iCT and 3D C-arm navigation yielded a comparable intraoperative accuracy (iCT 94.7% vs 3D C-arm 89.4%) and immediate correction of misplaced screws was feasible with both modalities (final accuracy: iCT 95.4% vs 3D C-arm 91.6%). Regarding the region specific performance, however, iCT-based navigation yielded significantly higher final accuracy rates in the cervical (iCT 99.5% vs 3D C-arm 88.9%, ∗P < 0.01) and thoracic (iCT 97.7% vs 3D C-arm 88.8%, ∗P < 0.001) regions.Conclusion.Both iCT and 3D C-arm–based spinal navigation provides high pedicle screw accuracy rates. Immediate screw assessability and placement accuracy in the cervical-thoracic spine, however, appear to be limited with intraoperative 3D C-arm imaging alone.Level of Evidence: 3

Journal

SpineWolters Kluwer Health

Published: Mar 1, 2018

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 12 million articles from more than
10,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Unlimited reading

Read as many articles as you need. Full articles with original layout, charts and figures. Read online, from anywhere.

Stay up to date

Keep up with your field with Personalized Recommendations and Follow Journals to get automatic updates.

Organize your research

It’s easy to organize your research with our built-in tools.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve Freelancer

DeepDyve Pro

Price
FREE
$49/month

$360/year
Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed
Create lists to
organize your research
Export lists, citations
Read DeepDyve articles
Abstract access only
Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles
Print
20 pages/month
PDF Discount
20% off