• Yun-Feng Xu, Qi Zhang, Xiao-Feng Le, Bo Liu, Da He, Yu-Qin Sun, Ya-Jun Liu, Qiang Yuan, Zhao Lang, Xiao-Guang Han, and Wei Tian.
• Department of Spine Surgery, Beijing Jishuitan Hospital and Peking University Fourth School of Clinical Medicine, Beijing, China.
• World Neurosurg. 2019 Apr 25.

ObjectiveTo compare one-time accuracy rate between simulated freehand (SFH) and navigation simulated (NS) pedicle screw insertion, assuming no second chance to correct screws.MethodsA simulated, comparative, cross-sectional study was conducted on 69 patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery. An intraoperative registration system captured the planned point of entry and trajectory of pedicle screws for both SFH under direct visualization and NS under navigation-aided visualization. Pedicle screw insertion was simulated for each captured image (370 screws) using Surgimap. Rajasekaran's method helped evaluate the point of entry accuracy and trajectory.ResultsAccuracy rate was better for the NS method (97.8%) than for the SFH method (63.8%). Of 370 screws in the SFH group, 134 penetrated the cortex, with 31 resulting in >4 mm penetration. Of 370 screws in the NS group, 8 penetrated the cortex, <4 mm penetration. Of 134 misplaced screws in the SFH group, 64 were due to error in the point of entry, 63 were due to error in the trajectory angle, and 7 were due to both errors. Of 8 errors in the NS group, 7 were due to the point of entry.ConclusionsIntraoperative navigation had significantly better one-time accuracy of pedicle screw insertion than freehand insertion and should be used to avoid injury to the pedicle and surrounding tissue from screw reinsertion.Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

5 keywords...

hide…