ObjectThe goal of this study was to determine the incidence of screw misplacement and complications in a group of 102 patients who underwent transpedicle screw fixation in the lumbosacral spine with conventional open technique and intraoperative fluoroscopy. The results are compared with published data.MethodsCases involving 102 consecutive patients (424 inserted screws) were reviewed. Surgery was performed in all cases by the same surgeon's team, using the same implant, and all results were assessed by means of a specific CT protocol. The screw position was assessed by the authors and an independent observer. Screw position was classified as correct when the screw was completely surrounded by the pedicle cortex, as “cortical encroachment” (questionable violation) if the pedicle cortex could not be visualized, and as “frank penetration” when the screw was outside the pedicular boundaries. Frank penetration was further subdivided as minor (when the edge of the screw thread was up to 2.0 mm outside the pedicle cortex), moderate (2.1–4 mm), and severe (> 4 mm). The incidence of intra- and postoperative complications not related to screw position as well as hardware failures were also registered, with a minimum follow-up duration of 8 months.ResultsThe rate of frank pedicle screw misplacement was 5%. The rate of minimal or questionable pedicle wall violation was 2.8%. Among the frank misplacements, 6 were classified as minor, 12 as moderate, and 3 as severe penetration. Two patients (2%) had radicular pain and neurological deficits (inferomedial and inferolateral minor misplacement at L-4 and L-5, respectively), and 5 patients (4.9%) complained only of radicular pain. At the follow-up examination all patients had completely recovered their neurological function and radicular pain was resolved in all cases. The complications not related to screw malposition were 2 pedicle fractures (2% of patients), 1 nerve root injury (1%), and 1 dural laceration (1%). Five patients (4.8%) had postoperative anemia and required transfusions. Superficial or deep wound infection was noted in 3 patients (2.9%). Late hardware failure occurred in 2 patients (2%). One patient developed adjacent segmental instability and required additional surgery to extend the fusion.ConclusionsOur rates of screw misplacement and complications compare favorably with the lowest rates of the series in which conventional technique was used and are close to the rates reported for image-guided methods. The risk of malpositioning may be reduced with careful preoperative surgical planning, accurate knowledge of the spinal anatomy, surgical experience, and correct indication for conventional surgery. The conventional technique still remains a practical, safe, and effective surgical method for lumbosacral fixation.
Preoperative diagnosis of benign intraorbital neoplasm was made by means of CT and MR scans; the mass was radically excised through a microsurgical lateral orbitotomy and the pathological examination revealed a schwannoma. Features of orbital schwannoma are described, together with some details concerning the surgical strategy and the history of the evolution of the lateral orbitotomy.
The problem of an incorrect level or side in lumbar surgery remains unresolved. The authors propose a useful and easily applied procedure to reduce such a risk. Larger studies comparing different methods of avoiding such errors will probably lead to the definition and wide adoption of a surgical behavior aiming to reach a near-zero error rate.
No relevant differences in long-term outcomes were observed in previously tested patients compared with patients implanted at once. Through this analysis we hope to recruit new centres, to give more scientific value to our results.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.