header advert
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

General Orthopaedics

COMPARISON OF AUTOMATICALLY AND MANUALLY OBTAINED PEDICLE SCREW PLANS IN DEFORMITIES OF THE THORACIC SPINE

The International Society for Technology in Arthroplasty (ISTA), 29th Annual Congress, October 2016. PART 3.



Abstract

Summary

Optimum position of pedicle screws can be determined preoperatively by CT based planning. We conducted a comparative study in order to analyse manually determined pedicle screw plans and those that were obtained automatically by a computer software and found an agreement in plans between both methods, yet an increase in fastening strengths was observed for automatically obtained plans.

Hypothesys

Automatic planning of pedicle screw positions and sizing is not inferior to manual planning

Design

Prospective comparative study

Introduction

Preoperative planning in spinal deformity surgery starts by a proper selection of implant anchors throughout the instrumented spine, where pedicle screws provide the optimum choice for bone fixation. In the case of severe spinal deformities, dysplastic pedicles can limit screw usage, and therefore studying the anatomy of vertebrae from preoperative images can aid in achieving the safest screw position through optimal fastening strength. The purpose of this study is to compare manually and automatically obtained preoperative pedicle screw plans.

Materials and Methods

CT scans of 17 deformed thoracic spines were studied by two experienced spine deformity surgeons, who placed 316 pedicle screws in 3D using a software positioning tool by aiming for the safest trajectory that permitted the largest possible screw sizes. The resulting manually obtained screw sizes, trajectory angles, entry points and normalised fastening strengths were compared to those obtained automatically by a dedicated computer software that, basing on vertebral anatomy and bone density in 3D, determined optimal screw sizes and trajectories.

Results

Statistically significant differences were observed between manually and automatically obtained plans for screw sizes (p < 0.05) and trajectory angles (p < 0.001). However, for automatically obtained plans, screws were not smaller in diameter (p < 0.05) or shorter in length (p < 0.001), while screw normalised fastening strengths were higher (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

In comparison to manual planning, automatically obtained plans did not result in smaller screw diameters or shorter screw lengths, which is in agreement with the definition of the pull-out strength, but in different screw trajectory angles, which is reflected by higher normalised fastening strengths.

Captions

Fig. 1. Visual comparison among automatically obtained (green colour) and manually defined pedicle screw placement plans by two experienced spine surgeons (red and blue colour) for three different patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis, shown from top to bottom in a three-dimensional view, left sagittal, right sagittal and coronal view.

Fig. 2. Histograms of differences between observers and (left column), between observer and automated method (middle column), and between observer and automated method (right column), shown from top to bottom for differences in pedicle screw pedicle screw diameter, sagittal inclination, and normalised fastening strength.

For figures/tables, please contact authors directly.


*Email: