This study aimed to review information on the subaxial cervical pedicle screw (CPS) including recent anatomical considerations, entry points, placement techniques, accuracy, learning curve, and complications. Relevant literatures were reviewed, and the authors' experiences were summarized. The CPS is used for reconstruction of unstable cervical spine and achieves superior biomechanical stability compared to other fixation techniques. Various insertion and guidance techniques are established, among which, lateral fluoroscopy-assisted placement is the most common and cost-effective technique. Generally, placement under imaging guidance is more accurate than other techniques, and a threedimensional template allows optimal trajectory for each pedicle regardless of intraoperative changes in spinal alignment. The free-hand technique using a curved pedicle probe without a funnel-like hole increases screw stability and reduces operation time, radiation exposure, and soft tissue injury. Compared to conventional lateral fluoroscopy-assisted placement, free-hand CPS placement by trained surgeons achieves superior accuracy comparable to that of image-guided navigation; in general, 30 training cases are sufficient for learning a safe and accurate technique for CPS placement. The complications of subaxial CPS are classified into three categories: complications due to screw misplacement, complications without screw misplacement, and others. Inexperienced surgeons may benefit from advanced techniques; however, the accuracy of CPS ultimately depends on the surgeon's experience. Inexperienced surgeons should master the placement of the thoracolumbar pedicle screw in real practice and practice CPS insertion using cadavers. During the initial phase of the learning curve, careful preparation of surgery, reiterated identification, patterned safety steps, and supervision of the expert are necessary.

No abstract

BACKGROUND C1 pedicle screw insertion is not easy, and more fluoroscopy can be required for safe insertion. Fluoroscopy is time consuming and increases patient radiation exposure. There have been no studies comparing the accuracy of C1 pedicle screw insertion using the fluoroscopy and free-hand techniques. OBJECTIVE To describe a free-hand C1 pedicle screw insertion method in patients with the posterior arch thickness of less than 4 mm in the thinnest part of the groove, and to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of C1 pedicle screw insertion using fluoroscopy vs using the free-hand technique. METHODS A total of 25 patients who had atlantoaxial instability with a C1 posterior arch <4 mm and were treated with C1 pedicle screw insertion were included. In 10 patients, fluoroscopy was used for C1 pedicle screw insertion, and 15 patients underwent the free-hand technique. We compared the radiologic and clinical outcomes between the 2 groups. RESULTS In patients who underwent the free-hand technique, 96.5% of screws were rated as safe (grade A or B), and 80.0% of screws in the fluoroscopy group were rated as safe. Postoperative occipital neuralgia occurred in one patient in the fluoroscopy group and did not occur in the free-hand technique group. There was no significant difference in the improvement of Nurick grade between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION C1 pedicle screw insertion using the free-hand technique is feasible and safe in patients with a C1 posterior arch <4 mm.