Pedicle Screw Placement Using Augmented Reality Surgical Navigation with Intraoperative 3D Imaging: A First In-Human Prospective Cohort Study

Spine

Volumn 44, Issue 7, 2019, Pages 517-525

  Elmi Terander, Adrian ^a,b   Burström, Gustav ^a,b   Nachabe, Rami ^c   Skulason, Halldor ^d   Pedersen, Kyrre ^b   Fagerlund, Michael ^b   Ståhl, Fredrik ^b   Charalampidis, Anastasios ^a,b   Söderman, Michael ^a,b   Holmin, Staffan ^a,b   Babic, Drazenko ^c   Jenniskens, Inge ^c   Edström, Erik ^a,b   Gerdhem, Paul ^a,b  

^a KAROLINSKA INSTITUTE   (Sweden)

^b KAROLINSKA UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

^c PHILIPS HEALTHCARE   (United States)

^d LANDSPITALI UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Iceland)

Author keywords

augmented reality; image guided surgery; intraoperative 3D cone beam computed tomography imaging; pedicle screw accuracy; scoliosis

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AUGMENTED REALITY SURGICAL NAVIGATION; CADAVER; CHILD; COBB ANGLE; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; INTRAOPERATIVE PERIOD; LUMBOSACRAL REGION; LUMBOSACRAL SPINE; MALE; MEASUREMENT ACCURACY; NON INVASIVE PROCEDURE; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; REOPERATION; SCHOOL CHILD; SCOLIOSIS; SPINE FUSION; THORACIC SPINE; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING; VIRTUAL REALITY; WOUND CLOSURE; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; COMPUTER ASSISTED SURGERY; DEVICES; LUMBAR VERTEBRA; MIDDLE AGED; PEDICLE SCREW; PROCEDURES; PROSTHESIS IMPLANTATION; SACRUM; SPINE DISEASE; THORACIC VERTEBRA; X-RAY COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; YOUNG ADULT;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AUGMENTED REALITY; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGING, THREE-DIMENSIONAL; LUMBAR VERTEBRAE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PEDICLE SCREWS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; PROSTHESIS IMPLANTATION; SACRUM; SPINAL DISEASES; SPINAL FUSION; SURGERY, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; THORACIC VERTEBRAE; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 85063284309     PISSN: 03622436     EISSN: 15281159     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000002876     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Kosmopulos V, Schizas C,. Pedicle screw placement accuracy: A meta-analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2007; 32: 111-120.
2. Sarwahi V, Ayan S, Amaral T,. Can postoperative radiographs accurately identify screw misplacement? Spine Deform 2017; 5: 109-116.
3. Bydon M, Xu R, Amin AG,. Safety and efficacy of pedicle screw placement using intraoperative computed tomography: Consecutive series of 1148 pedicle screws. J Neurosurg Spine 2014; 21: 320-328.
4. Zhang w, Takigawa T, Wu Y,. Accuracy of pedicle screw insertion in posterior scoliosis surgery: A comparison between intraoperative navigation and preoperative navigation techniques. Eur Spine J 2017; 26: 1756-1764.
5. Liu H, Chen W, Liu T,. Accuracy of pedicle screw placement based on preoperative computed tomography versus intraoperative data set acquisition for spinal navigation system. J Orthop Surg 2017; 25: 1-8.
6. Du JP, Fan Y, Wu QN,. Accuracy of pedicle screw insertion among 4 image-guided navigation systems: systematic review and meta-analysis. World Neurosurg 2018; 109: 24-30.
7. Tian W, Zeng C, An Y,. Accuracy and postoperative assessment of pedicle screw placement during scoliosis surgery with computer-assisted navigation: A meta-analysis. Int J Med Robot 2017; 13
8. Chan A, Parent E, Narvacan K,. Intraoperative image guidance compared with free-hand methods in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis posterior spinal surgery: A systematic review on screw-related complications and breach rates. Spine J 2017; 17: 1215-1229.
9. Xiao R, Miller JA, Sabharwal NC,. Clinical outcomes following spinal fusion using an intraoperative computed tomographic 3D imaging system. J Neurosurg Spine 2017; 26: 628-637.
10. Fichtner J, Hofmann N, Rienmuller A,. Revision rate of misplaced pedicle screws of the thoracolumbar spine-comparison of three-dimensional fluoroscopy navigation with freehand placement: A systematic analysis and review of the literature. World Neurosurg 2018; 109E24-e32.
11. Rahmathulla G, Nottmeier EW, Pirris SM,. Intraoperative image-guided spinal navigation: technical pitfalls and their avoidance. Neurosurg Focus 2014; 36E3.
12. Elmi-Terander A, Skulason H, Soderman M,. Surgical navigation technology based on augmented reality and integrated 3D intraoperative imaging: A spine cadaveric feasibility and accuracy study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2016; 41E1303-E1311.
13. Gertzbein SD, Robbins SE,. Accuracy of pedicular screw placement in vivo. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1990; 15: 11-14.
14. Gelalis ID, Paschos NK, Pakos EE,. Accuracy of pedicle screw placement: A systematic review of prospective in vivo studies comparing free hand, fluoroscopy guidance and navigation techniques. Eur Spine J 2012; 21: 247-255.
15. Costa F, Dorelli G, Ortolina A,. Computed tomography-based image-guided system in spinal surgery: state of the art through 10 years of experience. Neurosurgery 2015; 11: 59-67.
16. Hecht N, Yassin H, Czabanka M,. Intraoperative computed tomography versus 3D C-arm imaging for navigated spinal instrumentation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2018; 43: 370-377.
17. Silbermann J, Riese F, Allam Y,. Computer tomography assessment of pedicle screw placement in lumbar and sacral spine: Comparison between free-hand and O-arm based navigation techniques. Eur Spine J 2011; 20: 875-881.
18. Patil S, Lindley EM, Burger El,. Pedicle screw placement with O-arm and stealth station. Orthopedics 2012; 35E61-E65.
19. Van de Kleft E, Costa F, Van der Planken D,. A prospective multicenter registry on the accuracy of pedicle screw placement in the thoracic, lumbar, and sacral levels with the use of the O-arm imaging system and StealthStation navigation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2012; 37E1580-E1587.
20. Ling JM, Dinesh SK, Pang BC,. Routine spinal navigation for thoraco-lumbar pedicle screw insertion using the O-arm three-dimensional imaging system improves placement accuracy. J Clin Neurosci 2014; 21: 493-498.
21. Ammirati M, Salma A,. Placement of thoracolumbar pedicle screws using O-arm-based navigation: technical note on controlling the operational accuracy of the navigation system. Neurosurg Rev 2013; 36: 157-162.
22. Kleck C, Cullilmore I, Lafleur M,. A new 3-dimensional method for measuring precision in surgical navigation and methods to optimize navigation accuracy. Eur Spine J 2016; 25: 1764-1774.
23. Lekovic G, Potts E, Karahalios,. A comparison of two techniques in image-guided thoracic pedicle screw placement: A retrospective study of 37 patients and 277 pedicle screws. J Neurosurg Spine 2007; 7: 393-398.
24. Waschke A, Walter J, Duenisch P,. CT-navigation versus fluoroscopy-guided placement of pedicle screws at the thoracolumbar spine: single center experience of 4500 screws. Eur Spine J 2013; 22: 654-660.
25. Akazawa T, Kotani T, Sakuma T,. Evaluation of pedicle screw placement by pedicle channel grade in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: should we challenge narrow pedicles? J Orthop Sci 2015; 20: 818-822.
26. Larson AN, Santos ER, Polly DW Jr,. Pediatric pedicle screw placement using intraoperative computed tomography 3-dimensional image-guided navigation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2012; 37E188-E194.
27. Jin M, Liu Z, Qiu Y,. Incidence and risk factors for the misplacement of pedicle screws in scoliosis surgery assisted by O-arm navigation-analysis of a large series of one thousand, one hundred and forty five screws. Int Orthop 2017; 41: 773-780.
28. Sarwahi V, Wendolowski SF, Lo Y,. End vertebra versus apical vertebra: where are we more likely to misplace in spine deformity? J Pediatr Orthop 2017; [Epub ahead of print].
29. Liu Z, Jin M, Qiu Y,. The superiority of intraoperative O-arm navigation-assisted surgery in instrumenting extremely small thoracic pedicles of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: A case-control study. Medicine 2016; 95E3581.
30. Luther N, Iorgulescu JB, Geannette C,. Comparison of navigated versus non-navigated pedicle screw placement in 260 patients and 1434 screws: screw accuracy, screw size, and the complexity of surgery. J Spinal Disord Tech 2015; 28E298-E303.
31. Rajasekaran S, Bhushan M, Aiyer S,. Accuracy of pedicle screw insertion by Airo intraoperative CT in complex spinal deformity assessed by a new classification based on technical complexity of screw insertion. Eur Spine J 2018; [Epub ahead of print].
32. Rivkin MA, Yocom SS,. Thoracolumbar instrumentation with CT-guided navigation (O-arm) in 270 consecutive patients: Accuracy rates and lessons learned. Neurosurg Focus 2014; 36E7.
33. Noshchenko A, Cain C, Zaghloul K,. Pedicle screw placement assisted by 3D imaging (O-arm system with StealthStation software) versus free-hand technique for multilevel posterior thoracolumbar fusion. Curr Orthop Pract 2018; 29: 151-156.
34. Laudato PA, Pierzchala K, Schizas C,. Pedicle screw insertion accuracy using O-arm, robotic guidance, or freehand technique: A comparative study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2018; 43E373-E378.
35. Hecht N, Kampuis M, Czabanka M,. Accuracy and workflow of navigated spinal instrumentation with the mobile AiroCT scanner. Eur Spine J 2016; 25: 716-723.
36. Scheufler KM, Franke J, Eckardt A,. Accuracy of image-guided pedicle screw placement using intraoperative computed tomography-based navigation with automated referencing. Part II: thoracolumbar spine. Neurosurgery 2011; 69: 1307-1317.
37. Zindrick MR, Wiltse LL, Doornik A,. Analysis of the morphometric characteristics of the thoracic and lumbar pedicles. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1987; 12: 160-166.
38. Kotani T, Akazawa T, Sakuma T,. Accuracy of pedicle screw placement in scoliosis surgery: A comparison between conventional computed tomography-based and O-arm based navigation techniques. Asian Spine J 2014; 8: 331-338.
39. Ryang YM, Villard J, Obermuller T,. Learning curve of 3D fluoroscopy image-guided pedicle screw placement in the thoracolumbar spine. pine J 2015; 15: 467-476.
40. Zhang J, Weir V, Fajardo L,. Dosimetric characterization of a cone-beam O-arm imaging system. J Xray Sci Technol 2009; 17: 305-317.