A CT-based study investigating the relationship between pedicle screw placement and stimulation threshold of compound muscle action potentials measured by intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring.

PURPOSE: Neurophysiological monitoring aims to improve the safety of pedicle screw placement, but few quantitative studies assess specificity and sensitivity. In this study, screw placement within the pedicle is measured (post-op CT scan, horizontal and vertical distance from the screw edge to the surface of the pedicle) and correlated with intraoperative neurophysiological stimulation thresholds. METHODS: A single surgeon placed 68 thoracic and 136 lumbar screws in 30 consecutive patients during instrumented fusion under EMG control. The female to male ratio was 1.6 and the average age was 61.3 years (SD 17.7). Radiological measurements, blinded to stimulation threshold, were done on reformatted CT reconstructions using OsiriX software. A standard deviation of the screw position of 2.8 mm was determined from pilot measurements, and a 1 mm of screw-pedicle edge distance was considered as a difference of interest (standardised difference of 0.35) leading to a power of the study of 75 % (significance level 0.05). RESULTS: Correct placement and stimulation thresholds above 10 mA were found in 71 % of screws. Twenty-two percent of screws caused cortical breach, 80 % of these had stimulation thresholds above 10 mA (sensitivity 20 %, specificity 90 %). True prediction of correct position of the screw was more frequent for lumbar than for thoracic screws. CONCLUSION: A screw stimulation threshold of >10 mA does not indicate correct pedicle screw placement. A hypothesised gradual decrease of screw stimulation thresholds was not observed as screw placement approaches the nerve root. Aside from a robust threshold of 2 mA indicating direct contact with nervous tissue, a secondary threshold appears to depend on patients' pathology and surgical conditions

Biomechanical comparison of transdiscal fixation and posterior fixation with and without transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of L5–S1 lumbosacral joint

Transdiscal screw fixation is generally performed in the treatment of high-grade L5–S1 spondylolisthesis. The main thought of the study is that the biomechanical performances of the transdiscal pedicle screw fixation can be identical to standard posterior pedicle screw fixations with or without transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion cage insertion. Lumbosacral portions and pelvises of 45 healthy lambs’ vertebrae were dissected. Animal cadavers were randomly and equally divided into three groups for instrumentation. Three fixation systems, L5–S1 posterior pedicle screw fixation, L5–S1 posterior pedicle screw fixation with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion cage insertion, and L5–S1 transdiscal pedicle screw fixation, were generated. Axial compression, flexion, and torsion tests were conducted on test samples of each system. In axial compression, L5–S1 transdiscal fixation was less stiff than L5–S1 posterior pedicle screw fixation with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion cage insertion. There were no significant differences between groups in flexion. Furthermore, L5–S1 posterior fixation was stiffest under torsional loads. When axial compression and flexion loads are taken into consideration, transdiscal fixation can be alternatively used instead of posterior pedicle screw fixation in the treatment of L5–S1 spondylolisthesis because it satisfies enough stability. However, in torsion, posterior fixation is shown as a better option due to its higher stiffness

Triggered electromyography for placement of thoracic pedicle screws: is it reliable?

Reliable electromyography (EMG) thresholds for detecting medial breaches in the thoracic spine are lacking, and there is a paucity of reports evaluating this modality in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). This retrospective analysis evaluates the ability of triggered EMG to detect medial breaches with thoracic pedicle screws in patients with AIS. We reviewed 50 patients (937 pedicle screws) undergoing posterior spinal fusion (PSF) with intraoperative EMG testing. Postoperative CT scans were used for breach identification, and EMG values were analyzed. There were 47 medial breaches noted with a mean threshold stimulus of 10.2 mA (milliamperes). Only 8/47 breaches stimulated at 2–6 mA. Thirteen of the forty-seven screws tested at an EMG value ≤6 mA and/or a decrease of ≥65% compared with intraosseously placed screws. The sensitivity and positive predictive value for EMG was 0.28 and 0.21. A subanalysis of T10–T12 screws identified six of seven medial breaches. Using guidelines from the current literature, EMG does not appear to be reliable in detecting medial breaches from T2 to T9 but may have some utility from T10 to T12

Accuracy of free-hand placement of thoracic pedicle screws in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: how much of a difference does surgeon experience make?

The use of thoracic pedicle screws for the treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) has gained widespread popularity. However, the placement of pedicle screws in the deformed spine poses unique challenges, and surgeons experience a learning curve. The in vivo accuracy as determined by computed tomography (CT) of placement of thoracic pedicle screws in the deformed spine as a function of surgeon experience is unknown. We undertook a retrospective review to determine the effect of surgeon experience on the accuracy of thoracic pedicle screw placement in AIS. In 2005, we started to obtain routine postoperative CT scans on patients undergoing a spinal fusion. From a database of these patients, we selected AIS patients, who underwent a posterior spinal fusion. Fifteen consecutive patients for each of the following three groups stratified by attending surgeon experience were selected (N = 45): A) less than 20 cases of all pedicle screw constructs for AIS (surgeons <2 years of practice), B) 20–50 cases (surgeons 2–5 years of practice), and C) greater than 50 cases (surgeons greater than 5 years of practice). Intraoperative evaluation of all screws included probing of the pedicle screw tract, neurophysiologic monitoring, and fluoroscopic confirmation. A total of 856 thoracic pedicle screws were studied. Postoperative CT scans were evaluated by two spine surgeons and a consensus read established as follows: (1) In: intraosseous placement or ≤2-mm breach, (2) Out: >2-mm breach, either medial or lateral. Of the 856 screws, 104 demonstrated a >2-mm breach, for an overall rate of 12.1% (medial = 55, lateral = 49, P = 0.67). When the breach rates were stratified by surgeon experience, there was a trend toward decreased rate of breach for the most experienced surgeons, although this did not attain statistical significance (Group A: 12.7%, Group B: 12.9%, Group C: 10.8%, P = 0.58). However, the most experienced group (C) had a markedly decreased rate of medial breaches (3.5 vs. 7.4% and 8.4% for groups A and B, respectively, P < 0.01). The breach rate for the concave periapical screws was not statistically different from the overall breach rate (13.0% vs. 12.1%, P = 0.93). In conclusion, the overall accuracy of placement of pedicle screws in the deformed spine was 87.9%, with no neurologic, vascular, or visceral complications. Meticulous technique allows spine surgeons with a range of surgical experience to accurately and safely place thoracic pedicle screws in the deformed spine. The most experienced surgeons demonstrated the lowest rate of medial breaches