Cortical Bone Trajectory Screw Placement Research Articles

Comparison of No Tap (two-step) and tapping robotic assisted cortical bone trajectory screw insertion.

Workflow for cortical bone trajectory (CBT) screws includes tapping line-to-line or under tapping by 1mm. We describe a non-tapping, two-step workflow for CBT screw placement, and compare the safety profile and time savings to the Tap (three-step) workflow. Patients undergoing robotic assisted 1-3 level posterior fusion with CBT screws for degenerative conditions were identified and separated into either a No-Tap or Tap workflow. Number of total screws, screw-related complications, estimated blood loss, operative time, robotic time, and return to the operating room were collected and analyzed. There were 91 cases (458 screws) in the No-Tap and 88 cases (466 screws) in the Tap groups, with no difference in demographics, revision status, ASA grade, approach, number of levels fused or diagnosis between cohorts. Total robotic time was lower in the No-Tap (26.7min) versus the Tap group (30.3min, p = 0.053). There was no difference in the number of malpositioned screws identified intraoperatively (10 vs 6, p = 0.427), screws converted to freehand (3 vs 3, p = 0.699), or screws abandoned (3 vs 2, p = 1.000). No pedicle/pars fracture or fixation failure was seen in the No-Tap cohort and one in the Tap cohort (p = 1.00). No patients in either cohort were returned to OR for malpositioned screws. This study showed that the No-Tap screw insertion workflow for robot-assisted CBT reduces robotic time without increasing complications.

The accuracy of cortical bone trajectory screw placement guided by spinous process clamp hardware in lumbar spinal surgery: a retrospective study

This study aimed to assess the accuracy of cortical bone trajectory (CBT) screws placement guided by a spinous process clamp (SPC) guide. A total of 32 patients who received single-level midline lumbar fusion (MIDLF) surgery between June 2019 and January 2020 were retrospectively analyzed and divided into free-hand (FH) and SPC-guided groups according to the surgical approach. In the FH group, CBT screws was implanted with the assistance of fluoroscopy, while in the SPC group, CBT screws was implanted using the SPC navigator hardwire. A total of 128 screws were assessed in this study, with higher rates of clinically acceptable screw placement (grades A and B) and grade A screws in the SPC group than in the FH guide group (92.2% vs. 79.7%, P = 0.042 and 54.7% vs. 35.9%, P = 0.033, respectively). Misplacement screws (grades C, D, and E) occurred more often in the FH group than in the SPC guide group (20.3% vs. 7.8%, P = 0.042). The incidence of proximal facet joint violation (FJV) was higher in the FH group than in the SPC group (15.6% vs. 3.1%, P = 0.030). The radiation dose and time in the SPC guide group were comparable to those in the FH group (P = 0.063 and P = 0.078). The average operative time was significantly longer in the SPC guide group than in the FH group (267.8 ± 45.5 min vs. 210.9 ± 44.5 min, P = 0.001). Other clinical parameters, such as the average bone mineral density (BMD), intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative hospital stay, were not significantly different. Oswestry disability index (ODI) and back pain visual analogue scale (VAS) scores were significantly improved in both groups compared with preoperatively. SPC guided screw placement was more accurate than the fluoroscopy-assisted FH technique for single-level MIDLF at L4/5. Patients undergoing SPC-guided screw placement can achieve similar clinical outcomes as the fluoroscopy-assisted FH technique.

Accuracy of cortical bone trajectory screw fixation guided by spinous process clamp guide in lumbosacral vertebrae: Acadaver study.

The purpose of this study was to access the accuracy of cortical bone trajectory screw placement guided by spinous process clamp (SPC). Eight formalin-treated cadaveric lumbar specimens with T12-S1 were used. A total of 96 screws were implanted in eight lumbar specimens. In the freehand (FH) group, clinically acceptable placement (grade A and B) was 40 screws (83.3%), meanwhile 44 screws (91.7%) in the SPC guide group (p=0.217). The grade A screws in the SPC guide group were much more than that in the FH group (n=40 vs. n=31, p=0.036). The misplacement screws (grade C, D, and E) and proximal facet joint violation (FJV) in the SPC group was comparable to the FH group. This cadaveric study demonstrate that implanting CBT screws guided by SPC guide was more accuracy and reduces severe deviations in important directions.

Accuracy and Screw Insertion Time of Robotic-Assisted Cortical Bone Trajectory Screw Placement for Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Comparison of Early, Middle, and Late Phases.

Introduction The purpose of this study was toevaluate robotic-assisted cortical bone trajectory (CBT) screw placement. Early, middle, and late phases of robotic-assisted CBT screw placement were compared for accuracy and screw insertion time by comparing time and accuracy in every phase. Methods A retrospective review was conducted on the initial 40 patients who underwent spinal fusion using CBT screws in one institution from September 2021 to September 2022 utilizing a spine surgery robot system (Mazor X Stealth Edition, Medtronic Inc., Dublin, Ireland). The inclusion criterion was one- or two-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). Exclusion criteria were 1) patients who underwent posterior-lateral fusion in other segments, 2) patients who underwent additional decompression in other segments, 3) patients who underwent reoperation, and 4) patients with spondylolysis. The deviation of the CBT screw was evaluated on computed tomography (CT) one week after surgery using the Gertzbein-Robbins grade system. The rate of Grade A was considered the perfect accuracy rate, and the rate of penetration of 2 mm or more (Grades C, D, and E) was calculated as the deviation rate. To assess the learning curve, patients were divided into three groups. The first 10 cases were in the early phase group, the subsequent 10 cases were in the middle phase group, and the last 10 cases were in the late phase group. We compared the perfect accuracy rate, deviation rate, operative time, operative time per segment, intraoperative blood loss, registration time, and screw insertion time among the three groups. Results Thirty patients met the criteria. Overall, the perfect accuracy (Grade A) rate of the screw was 95.3% and the deviation rate was 1.4%. The perfect accuracy rate was 90.4% in the early phase, 95.5% in the middle phase, and 100% in the late phase. The deviation rate was 3.8% in the early phase, 0% in the middle phase, and 0% in the late phase, and there was no statistically significant difference between the three groups. Among the three groups, the operative time, the operative time per segment, the intraoperative blood loss, and the registration time were not significantly different. There was no significant difference in the screw insertion time among the three groups, but it decreased with experience (early phase: 156.9 ± 54.7 sec, middle phase: 139.9 ± 41.6 sec, and late phase: 106.4 ± 39.9 sec, p=0.060). The screw insertion time of the late phase tended to be shorter than that of the early phase (p=0.052). Conclusions The deviation rate of robotic-assisted CBT screw placement with one- or two-level PLIF was 1.4%, which was highly accurate. The deviation rate was 3.8% in the early phase, 0% in the middle phase, and 0% in the late phase. Although the deviation rate was low even in the early period, the screw insertion time in the early 10 cases tended to be longer than that in the late 10 cases. After passing the experience of 10 cases, this study concluded that robotic-assisted CBT screw placement was proficient.

Cortical screw placement with a spinous process clamp guide: a cadaver study accessing accuracy

Background and objectiveThe Cortical Bone Trajectory (CBT) technique provides an alternative method for fixation in the lumbar spine in patients with osteoporosis. An accuracy CBT screw placement could improve mechanical stability and reduce complication rates.PurposeThe purpose of this study is to explore the accuracy of cortical screw placement with the application of implanted spinous process clip (SPC) guide.Methods and materialsFour lumbar specimens with T12-S1 were used to access the accuracy of the cortical screw. The SPC-guided planning screws were compared to the actual inserted screws by superimposing the vertebrae and screws preoperative and postoperative CT scans. According to preoperative planning, the SPC guide was adjusted to the appropriate posture to allow the K-wire drilling along the planned trajectory. Pre and postoperative 3D-CT reconstructions was used to evaluate the screw accuracy according to Gertzbein and Robbins classification. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and Bland–Altman plots were used to examine SPC-guided agreements for CBT screw placement.ResultsA total of 48 screws were documented in the study. Clinically acceptable trajectory (grades A and B) was accessed in 100% of 48 screws in the planning screws group, and 93.8% of 48 screws in the inserted screws group (p = 0.242). The incidence of proximal facet joint violation (FJV) in the planning screws group (2.1%) was comparable to the inserted screws group (6.3%) (p = 0.617). The lateral angle and cranial angle of the planned screws (9.2 ± 1.8° and 22.8 ± 5.6°) were similar to inserted screws (9.1 ± 1.7° and 23.0 ± 5.1°, p = 0.662 and p = 0.760). Reliability evaluated by intraclass correlation coefficients and Bland–Altman showed good consistency in cranial angle and excellent results in lateral angle and distance of screw tip.ConclusionsCompared with preoperative planning screws and the actually inserted screws, the SPC guide could achieve reliable execution for cortical screw placement.

Feasibility and improvement of a three-dimensional printed navigation template for modified cortical bone trajectory screw placement in the lumbar spine.

Compared with traditional pedicle screw trajectory, cortical bone trajectory (CBT) increases the contact surface between the screw and cortical bone where the screw is surrounded by dense cortical bone, which does not deform remarkably due to degeneration. We aimed to provide detailed information about the improvement of three-dimensional (3D)-printed navigation templates for modified CBT screw placement in the lumbar spine and evaluate the safety and accuracy thereof. Four human cadaveric lumbar spine specimens were selected. After CT scanning data were reconstructed to 3D models, either the left or right side of each specimen was randomly selected to establish a 3D-navigation template, mutually complemented with the surface anatomical structure of the lateral margin of the lumbar isthmus, vertebral plate, and spinous process. The corresponding 3D centrum was printed according to the CT scanning data, and a navigation template of supporting design was made according to modified cortical bone technique. The same template was used to insert CBT screws into 3D printed and cadaveric specimens. After the screws were inserted, the screw path of the 3D printed specimens was directly observed, and that of the anatomical specimens was scanned by CT, to determine the position and direction of the screws to analyze the success rate of screw placement. Twenty cortical bone screws were placed in each of the 3D printed and anatomical specimens, with excellent rates of screw placement of 100% and 95%, respectively. We report the easy, safe, accurate, and reliable use of a 3D-printed navigation template to carry out screw placement by modified cortical bone technique in the lumbar spine.

Accuracy and safety of robot-assisted cortical bone trajectory screw placement: a comparison of robot-assisted technique with fluoroscopy-assisted approach

ObjectiveTo compare the safety and accuracy of cortical bone trajectory screw placement between the robot-assisted and fluoroscopy-assisted approaches.MethodsThis retrospective study was conducted between November 2018 and June 2020, including 81 patients who underwent cortical bone trajectory (CBT) surgery for degenerative lumbar spine disease. CBT was performed by the same team of experienced surgeons. The patients were randomly divided into two groups—the fluoroscopy-assisted group (FA, 44 patients) and the robot-assisted group (RA, 37 patients). Robots for orthopedic surgery were used in the robot-assisted group, whereas conventional fluoroscopy-guided screw placement was used in the fluoroscopy-assisted group. The accuracy of screw placement and rate of superior facet joint violation were assessed using postoperative computed tomography (CT). The time of single screw placement, intraoperative blood loss, and radiation exposure to the surgical team were also recorded. The χ2 test and Student’s t-test were used to analyze the significance of the variables (P < 0.05).ResultsA total of 376 screws were inserted in 81 patients, including 172 screws in the robot-assisted group and 204 pedicle screws in the fluoroscopy-assisted group. Screw placement accuracy was higher in the RA group (160, 93%) than in the FA group (169, 83%) (P = 0.003). The RA group had a lower violation of the superior facet joint than the FA group. The number of screws reaching grade 0 in the RA group (58, 78%) was more than that in the FA group (56, 64%) (P = 0.041). Screw placement time was longer in the FA group (7.25 ± 0.84 min) than in the RA group (5.58 ± 1.22 min, P < 0.001). The FA group had more intraoperative bleeding (273.41 ± 118.20 ml) than the RA group (248.65 ± 97.53 ml, P = 0.313). The radiation time of the FA group (0.43 ± 0.07 min) was longer than the RA group (0.37 ± 0.10 min, P = 0.001). Furthermore, the overall learning curve tended to decrease.ConclusionsRobot-assisted screw placement improves screw placement accuracy, shortens screw placement time, effectively improves surgical safety and efficiency, and reduces radiation exposure to the surgical team. In addition, the learning curve of robot-assisted screw placement is smooth and easy to operate.

Feasibility of cortical bone trajectory screws for bridging fixation in revision surgery for lumbar adjacent segment degeneration.

Background:To investigate the feasibility of using cortical bone trajectory (CBT) screws for bridging fixation in revision surgery for lumbar adjacent segment degeneration and to provide a reference for clinical practice.Methods:Computed tomography scans of the lumbar spines of 36 patients in our hospital were used. Sixteen males and 20 females with an average age of 65.5 ± 10.5 years (range: 46 to 83 years) were included. Three-dimensional reconstruction was performed using computer software. Screws with appropriate sizes were selected for the L1 to L5 vertebral segments, and traditional pedicle screws were placed using the standard method. After completing screw placement, simulated placement of CBT screws was performed separately. No overlap occurred between the two screws in the process of CBT screw placement, and the placement point and direction were adjusted until screw placement completion. After all screw placement simulations were complete, according to the contact area of the cortical bone of the screw trajectory and the screw puncture position and distance through the trajectory, the screw placement results were categorized as excellent, good, general, and failure. Excellent and good ratings were considered successful, while a general rating was regarded as acceptable. Then, the success rate and acceptable rate of each segment of the lumbar spine were calculated.Results:Three hundred and sixty screw placement simulations were performed in lumbar pedicles, and 72 CBT screws were implanted in each vertebral body of the lumbar spine. The success rates in the L1 to L5 segments were 73.6%, 80.6%, 83.3%, 88.9%, and 77.8%, respectively, and the acceptable rates were 91.7%, 97.2%, 97.2%, 100%, and 91.7%, respectively. The overall success rate and acceptable rate of CBT screw placement in the lumbar spine were 80.8% and 95.6%, respectively.Conclusion:CBT screws are feasible for bridging fixation in lumbar adjacent segment degeneration revision surgery, and the accuracy of screw placement in different lumbar vertebrae varies.

Biomechanical performance of bicortical versus pericortical bone trajectory (CBT) pedicle screws.

The cortical bone trajectory (CBT) is an alternative to the traditional pedicle screw trajectory (TT) in posterior spinal instrumentation, enhancing screw contact with cortical bone and therefore increasing fixation strength. Additional to the trajectory, insertion depth (pericortical vs. bicortical placement) could be a relevant factor affecting the fixation strength. However, the potential biomechanical benefit of a bicortical placement of CBT screws is unknown. Therefore, the aim of this study was to quantify the fixation strength of pericortical- versus bicortical-CBT (pCBT versus bCBT) screws in a randomized cadaveric study. Pedicle screws were either placed pericortical or bicortical with a CBT in 20 lumbar vertebrae (2 × 20 instrumented pedicles) from four human spine cadavers by using patient-specific templates. Instrumented specimens underwent physiological cyclic loading testing (1'800'000 cycles, 10Hz), including shear and tension loads as well as bending moments. Translational and angular displacements of the screws were quantified and compared between the two techniques. There was a slight decrease in translational (0.2mm ± 0.09 vs. 0.24mm ± 0.11) and angular displacements (0.06° ± 0.05 vs. 0.13° ± 0.11) of bCBT screws when compared with pCBT screws after 1'800'000 cycles. However, the results were non-significant (p > 0.05). The authors do not recommend placing CBT screws bicortically, as no relevant biomechanical advantage is gained while the potential risk for iatrogenic injury to structures anterior to the spine is increased.

Simulation with 3D Neuronavigation for Learning Cortical Bone Trajectory Screw Placement.

Learning a new technique in neurosurgery is a big challenge especially for trainees. In recent years, simulations and simulators got into the focus as a teaching tool. Our objective is to propose a simulator for placement of cortical bone trajectory (CBT) screws to improve results and reduce complications. We have created a platform consisting of a sawbone navigated with a 3D fluoroscope to familiarize our trainees and consultants with CBT technique and later implement it in our department. Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS) and Physician Performance Diagnostic Inventory Scale (PPDI) were obtained before and after the use of the simulator by the five participants in the study. Patients who were operated on after the implementation of the technique were retrospectively reviewed. During the simulation, there were 4 cases of pedicle breach out of 24 screws inserted (16.6%). After having completed simulation, participants demonstrated an improvement in OSATS and PPDI (p = 0.039 and 0.042, respectively). Analyzing the answers to the different items of the tests, participants mainly improved in the knowledge (p = 0.038), the performance (p = 0.041), and understanding of the procedure (p = 0.034). In our retrospective series, eight patients with L4-L5 instability were operated on using CBT, improving their Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score (preoperative ODI 58.5 [SD 16.7] vs. postoperative ODI 31 [SD 13.4]; p = 0.028). One intraoperative complication due to a dural tear was observed. In the follow-up, we found a case of pseudoarthrosis and a facet joint violation, but no other complications related to misplacement, pedicle fracture, or hardware failure. The simulation we have created is useful for the implementation of CBT. In our study, consultants and trainees have valued very positively the learning obtained using the system. Moreover, simulation facilitated the learning of the technique and the understanding of surgical anatomy. We hope that simulation helps reducing complications in the future.

Robotic-assisted cortical bone trajectory (CBT) screws using the Mazor X Stealth Edition (MXSE) system: workflow and technical tips for safe and efficient use.

Robotic-assisted spine surgery has a number of potential advantages, including more precise pre-operative planning, a high degree of accuracy in screw placement, and significantly reduced radiation exposure to the surgical team. While the current primary goal of these systems is to improve the safety of spine surgery by increasing screw accuracy, there are a number of technical errors that may increase the risk of screw malposition. Given the learning curve associated with this technology, it is important for the surgeon to have a thorough understanding of all required steps. In this article, we will demonstrate the setup and workflow of a combined navigation and robotic spine surgery platform using the Mazor X Stealth Edition (MXSE) system to place cortical-based trajectory (CBT) screws, including a review of all technical tips and pearls to efficiently perform this procedure with minimal risk of screw malposition. In this article, we will review surgical planning, operating room setup, robotic arm mounting, registration, and CBT screw placement using the MXSE system.

The Feasibility of Assessing the Cortical Bone Trajectory Screw Placement Accuracy Using a Traditional Pedicle Screw Insertion Evaluation System.

This was a retrospective observational study. We aimed to characterize the feasibility of assessing the accuracy of cortical bone trajectory (CBT) screw placement in midline lumbar interbody fusion using a traditional pedicle screw insertion accuracy evaluation system based on computed tomography (CT). Since Santoni and colleagues proposed CBT as an alternative approach for the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease, CBT has been biomechanically and clinically investigated in detail. The reported misplacement rate was 0%-12.5%. Therefore, these cortical screws may result in severe complications, such as nerve root, vascular, and spinal cord injuries. However, to the best of our knowledge, the accuracy of the current assessment system of cortical bone screw placement has not been described clearly. Overall, 342 cortical screws of 69 consecutive patients with lumbar degenerative disease who underwent midline lumbar interbody fusion surgery in one surgeon's initial phase were examined retrospectively. A comprehensive and detailed pedicle screw accuracy classification and grading system was introduced in our study, including 5 types of misplacement: (1) medial and (2) lateral cortical bone perforation (MCP and LCP) of the corresponding pedicle, (3) anterior cortical bone perforation of the vertebral body, (4) endplate perforation, and (5) foraminal perforation (FP). The degree of interobserver and intraobserver agreement with regard to the screw positions based on CT were used as indicators of the reliability of the modified classification system. All patients were retrospectively assessed for screw placement-related complications throughout the entire treatment course to evaluate the relationship between the procedure adequacy and neurological symptoms. The interobserver and intraobserver agreements were substantial-to-almost perfect (κ=0.78 and 0.88, respectively) in distinguishing the acceptable-placed pedicle screws from those with partial or complete cortical perforation. In the MCP and LCP-the most common types of misplacement-the interobserver agreement was substantial (κ=0.70 and 0.76, respectively), and the intraobserver agreement was almost perfect (κ=0.85 and 0.89, respectively). In total, there are 7 (2.05%) MCP and 65 (19.01%) LCP screws. The screw placement-related complication rate is significantly higher in the MCP and FP groups than that in the LCP group. Our study demonstrated that using a pedicle screw classification and grading system based on CT to assess the accuracy of CBT screw placement is feasible and practical. MCP and FP screws are more likely to cause neurological deficits with statistical significance, especially grade 2 MCP. We recommend inexperienced surgeons choose a lateral trajectory rather than a medial one if they cannot ensure accurate screw insertion. Level III.

Risk of pedicle and spinous process violation during cortical bone trajectory screw placement in the lumbar spine

BackgroundPrevious studies have confirmed the feasibility of the cortical bone trajectory (CBT) technique. However, there are few reports on spinous process violation and screw penetration during the screw insertion. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the incidence of spinous process violation and screw penetration through the pedicle during CBT screw insertion.MethodsComputed tomography (CT) scans with normal lumbar structures were consecutively obtained and three-dimensional (3D) reconstructions of the lumbar spine were created. Bilateral CBT screw placement was simulated on each segment using a screw diameter of 4.5 mm, 5.0 mm, or 5.5 mm. Incidences of these complications were recorded and analyzed.ResultsA total of 90 patients were enrolled. Spinous process violation was observed in 68.3, 53.3, 25.5, 1.7, and 0% from L1 to L5, respectively, using 4.5 mm screws. A significant difference was found among the five segments but this was unconnected to gender or screw diameter. The incidence of screw penetration through the inner wall decreased from L1 to L4; in turn, L1 (16.7–35.5%), L2 (12.7–34.4%), L3 (2.8–23.8%) and L4 (1.1–6.7%). This trend was reversed in L5 (6.7–16.7%). Moreover, screw penetration through the outer wall was rare. The incidence of screw penetration varied with screw size as well as lumbar level, but not with gender.ConclusionsThere are more difficulties of CBT screw fixation in upper lumbar spine. The low rate of screw penetration, using 4.5 mm screws, suggests the safety for CBT fixation in the lumbar spine. Larger screws (5.0 mm or 5.5 mm) are more recommended for use in the lower lumbar spine. Moreover, CBT fixation in L5 deserves greater attention because of the unique morphology of the pedicle.

Accuracy and safety of cortical bone trajectory screw placement by an inexperienced surgeon using 3D patient-specific guides for transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

Cortical bone trajectory (CBT) is an alternative method for pedicle screw insertion. However, identification of the optimal entry point and the direction of the CBT can be challenging for less-experienced surgeons. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of the CBT screw placement by an inexperienced surgeon using a three-dimensional (3D) patient-specific guide for transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). Retrospective analysis of the data pertaining to 30 patients (128 screws) who underwent TLIF with CBT by an inexperienced surgeon using a 3D patient-specific guide (MySpine MC, Medacta) at a single center was performed. The accuracy of the CBT screw was graded into four groups (no perforation; Grade A, 0–2 mm; Grade B, 2–4 mm; and Grade C, > 4 mm). The accuracy of the CBT screw placement was 91% (116/128). Out of the 12 misplaced screws, Grade A was observed in 7 screws (5%), Grade B was observed in 3 screws (2%), and Grade C was observed in 2 screws (2%). There were no cases of medial pedicle wall perforation. The mean screw size was 5.95 ± 0.34 mm in diameter and 40.15 ± 2.83 mm in length. Note that, the accuracy of the CBT screws increased to 97% (83/86) over the first10 cases. Preoperative planning and 3D patient-specific guide enabled the use of longer and thicker screws and an optimal entry point. These results suggest the possibility of efficacy and safety in using 3D patient-specific guides for CBT screw placement by an inexperienced surgeon.

Accuracy of cortical bone trajectory screw placement in midline lumbar fusion (MIDLF) with intraoperative cone beam navigation.

Cortical bone trajectory (CBT) screws have been recently described as a method of lumbosacral fixation. These screws are typically inserted under fluoroscopic guidance with a medial-to-lateral trajectory in the axial plane and a caudal-to-cephalad trajectory in the sagittal plane. In an effort to reduce surgeon radiation exposure and improve accuracy, CBT screws may be inserted under navigation with intraoperative cone beam computed tomography (CT). However, the accuracy of CBT screw placement under intraoperative navigation has yet to be assessed in the literature. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the accuracy of CBT screw placement using intraoperative cone beam CT navigation. One hundred and thirty-four consecutive patients who underwent CBT fixation with 618 screws under intraoperative navigation were analyzed from May 2016 through May 2018. Screws were placed by one of three senior spine surgeons using the Medtronic O-Arm Stealth Navigation. Screw position and accuracy were assessed on intraoperative and postoperative CT scans using 2D and 3D reconstructions with VitreaCore software. The majority of surgeries were primary cases (73.1%). The mean age at the time of surgery was 61.5±10.0 years and the majority of patients were female (61.2%). Most patients underwent surgery for a diagnosis of degenerative spondylolisthesis (47.8%) followed by mechanical collapse with foraminal stenosis (22.4%). Ten violations of the vertebral cortex were noted with an average breach distance of 1.0±0.7 mm. Three breaches were lateral (0.5%) and seven were medial (1.1%). The overall navigated screw accuracy rate was 98.3%. The accuracy to within 1 mm of error was 99.2%. There were no intra-operative neurologic, vascular, or visceral complications related to the placement of the CBT screws. CBT screw fixation under an intraoperative cone beam CT navigated insertion technique is safe and reliable. Despite five breaches greater than 1mm, there were no complications related to the placement of the CBT screws in this series.

Accuracy of cortical bone trajectory screw placement using patient-specific template guide system.

Cortical bone trajectory (CBT) can facilitate both minimum invasiveness and strong screw fixation; however, ensuring the ideal cortical trajectory is challenging due to the narrow corridor, necessitating high-level surgical skill. A patient-specific template guide for CBT screw placement may be a promising solution to improve accuracy and safety. Little has been reported on the use of a CBT screw guide in clinical practice. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the accuracy of CBT screw placement using the template guide. This study was a retrospective clinical evaluation of prospectively collected patients. Forty-three consecutively enrolled patients who underwent posterior lumbar spinal fusion using the guide system were included. First, three-dimensional planning of CBT screw placement was performed using computer simulation software. The trajectory was directed in a more anterior position of the vertebral body, compared with the original CBT, and the standard size was set as 5-6mm in diameter and 40-45mm in length. Then, screw guides were created for each vertebra preoperatively and used. The safety and accuracy of a total of 198 inserted screws (L1 to L5) were analyzed using postoperative computed tomography by evaluation of pedicle perforation and measurement of screw deviations between the planned and actual screw positions. A total of 193 screws (97.5%) were placed completely inside the pedicle and there was no incidence of neurovascular injuries. The mean screw deviation from the planned trajectory on the coronal plane at the midpoint of the pedicle was 0.62 ± 0.42mm, and the mean angular deviations in the sagittal and transverse planes were 1.68 ± 1.24° and 1.27 ± 0.77°, respectively. CBT screw placement using a patient-specific template guide was accurate enough for clinical application. This technique could be an effective solution to achieve both correct screw insertion and a reduction of complications.

Cortical Bone Trajectory Screw Placement Accuracy with a Patient-Matched 3-Dimensional Printed Guide in Lumbar Spinal Surgery: A Clinical Study

Cortical bone trajectory (CBT) screw is an attractive technique in terms of fixation strength and less invasiveness. However, the insertion of a pedicle screw penetrating cortical bone on the ideal trajectory is technically demanding. The use of 3-dimensional (3D) patient-matched guides may facilitate the use of this technique. In this technical note and case series, the use of a patient-matched 3D targeting guide for a circumferential fixation with CBT screws is described. Eleven patients with a mean age of 49 years were treated. The MySpine MC (Medacta International SA, Castel San Pietro, Switzerland) technology was used to place CBT screws. A computed tomography (CT) scan-derived 3D model of the patient vertebra was created after the surgeons planned the best custom CBT screw trajectory. Then, scaffolds were printed and used during surgery to guide the screw through the patient pedicle. An intersomatic arthrodesis was also performed. The images of the planned trajectory were superimposed on the postoperative CT scan, confirming the accuracy of the trajectory. The mean deviation from the planned pedicle midpoint was 0.91 mm; 85.2% of the screws were placed within 2° from the planned trajectory. There were 2 grade A (<2 mm) and no grade B or C perforations. The actual entry point was always within 2 mm from the planned entry point. This technical note and case series is the first clinical description on the use of a patient-matched guide for posterior CBT screw placement. The use of these devices could also improve placement accuracy and decrease the risk of nerve damage.

Validation of a freehand technique for cortical bone trajectory screws in the lumbar spine.

The cortical bone trajectory (CBT) technique for pedicle screw placement has gained popularity among spinal surgeons. It has been shown biomechanically to provide better fixation and improved pullout strength compared to a traditional pedicle screw trajectory. The CBT technique also allows for a less invasive approach for fusion and may have lower incidence of adjacent-level disease. A limitation of the current CBT technique is a lack of readily identifiable and reproducible visual landmarks to guide freehand CBT screw placement in comparison to the well-defined identifiable landmarks for traditional pedicle screw insertion. The goal of this study was to validate a safe and intuitive freehand technique for placement of CBT screws based on optimization of virtual CBT screw placement using anatomical landmarks in the lumbar spine. The authors hypothesized that virtual identification of anatomical landmarks on 3D models of the lumbar spine generated from CT scans would translate to a safe intraoperative freehand technique. Customized, open-source medical imaging and visualization software (3D Slicer) was used in this study to develop a workflow for virtual simulation of lumbar CBT screw insertion. First, in an ex vivo study, 20 anonymous CT image series of normal and degenerative lumbar spines and virtual screw insertion were conducted to place CBT screws bilaterally in the L1-5 vertebrae for each image volume. The optimal safe CBT trajectory was created by maximizing both the screw length and the cortical bone contact with the screw. Easily identifiable anatomical surface landmarks for the start point and trajectory that best allowed the reproducible idealized screw position were determined. An in vivo validation of the determined landmarks from the ex vivo study was then performed in 10 patients. Placement of virtual "test" cortical bone trajectory screws was simulated with the surgeon blinded to the real-time image-guided navigation, and the placement was evaluated. The surgeon then placed the definitive screw using image guidance. From the ex vivo study, the optimized technique and landmarks were similar in the L1-4 vertebrae, whereas the L5 optimized technique was distinct. The in vivo validation yielded ideal, safe, and unsafe screws in 62%, 16%, and 22% of cases, respectively. A common reason for the nonidealized trajectories was the obscuration of patient anatomy secondary to severe degenerative changes. CBT screws were placed ideally or safely 78% of the time in a virtual simulation model. A 22% rate of unsafe freehand trajectories suggests that the CBT technique requires use of image-guided navigation or x-ray guidance and that reliable freehand CBT screw insertion based on anatomical landmarks is not reliably feasible in the lumbar spine.

Preoperative 3D CT Planning for Cortical Bone Trajectory Screws: A Retrospective Radiological Cohort Study

Pedicle screw instrumentation is a standard procedure in lumbar spinal fusion. The cortical bone trajectory (CBT) screw is an alternative technique, less invasive but harder to perform. The identification of the entry point and the appropriate direction can be tricky especially to the surgeons just at the beginning. Therefore, the aim of this study is to evaluate the reliability of preoperative computed tomography (CT) planning in the CBT screw placement. We retrospectively evaluated 82 patients who underwent a single-level posterior lumbar arthrodesis with CBT screws. The correct entry point and the best trajectory were identified on a 3-dimensional (3D) multiplanar reconstruction CT view. The concordance between achieved and planned trajectories was assessed on a postoperative CT. A total of 328 screws was positioned. The average entry point distance from the target was 1.1 mm (standard deviation, ±0.15 mm). In 301 screws (91.8%), the obtained trajectory differed no more than 2° from the planned one. No screws misplaced or new neurological deficit was recorded. The CBT screw placement is a great alternative to the pedicle screw. Accurate preoperative 3D planning is useful to predict the entry point and the direction with accuracy similar to navigation systems, avoiding its costs and technical difficulties. The 3D CT planning is helpful in the customization of spine surgery, and the results underline the radiological reliability of this technique.

Comparison of Cortical Bone Trajectory Screw Placement Using the Midline Lumbar Fusion Technique to Traditional Pedicle Screws: A Case-Control Study.

Cortical bone trajectory (CBT) screws are an alternative to traditional pedicle screws (PS) for lumbar fixation. The proposed benefits of CBT screws include decreased approach-related morbidity and greater cortical bone contact to prevent screw pullout. Relatively little data is published on this technique. Here, we compare the midline lumbar fusion (MIDLF) approach for CBT screw placement to transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) for traditional PS placement. A prospectively maintained institutional database was retrospectively reviewed for all patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusion using CBT screws over the past 5 years. Controls were identified from the same database as patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusion with traditional PS placement and matched based on age, sex, and number of levels fused. Exclusion criteria included prior lumbar instrumentation. The electronic health record was retrospectively reviewed for demographic, perioperative, and postoperative data. A total of 23 patients who underwent CBT screw placement and 35 controls who received traditional PS were included in the study. The median follow-up time was 52.5 months. The CBT screw group had significantly less mean estimated blood loss than the PS group (186 mL versus 414 mL respectively; P = .008). Both groups experienced significant improvements in preoperative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and visual analog scale (VAS) scores for back and leg pain. However, there was no significant difference between the groups in regard to operative time and amount of improvement in VAS pain score or ODI. The CBT group was associated with a significantly shorter mean length of stay (LOS). There were 2 instances of screw pullout in each group. The MIDLF approach with CBT screw placement is associated with less intraoperative blood loss and shorter LOS than traditional PS placement. There is no difference between the 2 techniques in regard to improvement in pain or disability.