Usefulness of a New Electronic Conductivity Device with a Pedicle Probe and a Multi-axis Angiography Unit for Inserting a C1 Lateral Mass Screw Safely and Tightly: A Technical Note

Kageyama, Hiroto; Yoshimura, Shinichi; Matsuda, Ken‐ichi; Yoshida, Yasunori; Matsukawa, Hidetoshi; Yamada, Kiyofumi

doi:10.2176/nmc.tn.2019-0025

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“… 16) Chaput et al reported that pedicle screw placement with ECD guidance was accurate and decreased irradiation levels in clinical practice. 17) Other studies have also shown the accuracy of screw placement, even for the placement of cervical pedicle screws in children, 23) C1 lateral mass screws, 24) and S2 alar iliac screws. 25) Thus, since 2005, when the ECD was released, many studies have reported the efficiency of screw insertion using ECD in spinal surgery.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Accuracy of Pedicle Screw Placement Comparing an Electronic Conductivity Device and a Multi-axis Angiography Unit with C-arm Fluoroscopy in Lumbar Fixation Surgery for Safety

Kageyama¹,

Yoshimura²,

Tatebayashi³

et al. 2021

Neurol. Med. Chir.(Tokyo)

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy, safety, and usefulness of percutaneous pedicle screw (PPS) placement for lumbar fixation using a multi-axis angiography unit (MAU) and an electronic conductivity device (ECD) with a cannulated Jamshidi needle with that using a conventional C-arm. Of 65 cases that underwent lumbar fixation (region between L1-S1) during April 2013 to March 2019, 57 cases that could be followed-up for more than 12 months after the procedure were included. Among them, 31 patients (150 screws) received treatment with MAU and ECD (MAU+ECD group) and 26 (117 screws) were treated with the conventional C-arm. We performed a retrospective study of the surgical techniques used in each group at our institute by assessing the accuracy of PPS using Gertzbin–Robbins classification and the Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score for recovery. There was no significant difference in surgery outcome based on the JOA recovery rate. There was a significant difference between the two groups in terms of Accuracy-1 (Group A indicating accuracy and Groups B–E indicating inaccuracy), where the rates were 85.3% and 72.0% in the MAU+ECD group and C-arm group, respectively ( P = 0.008). There was also a significant difference between the two groups in terms of Accuracy-2 (Groups A–B indicating accuracy; Groups C–E indicate inaccuracy), where the rates were 98.0% and 92.4% in the MAU+ECD and C-arm groups, respectively ( P = 0.036). A combination of MAU and ECD is a safe and accurate method for inserting screws into the pedicle.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Accuracy of Pedicle Screw Placement Comparing an Electronic Conductivity Device and a Multi-axis Angiography Unit with C-arm Fluoroscopy in Lumbar Fixation Surgery for Safety

Kageyama¹,

Yoshimura²,

Tatebayashi³

et al. 2021

Neurol. Med. Chir.(Tokyo)

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…New applications and techniques have been designed for ECD. Besides the percutaneous transpedicular puncture in patients with vertebral compression fractures, 19 Kageyama et al 39 found ECD was useful for an optimal positioning of bi-cortical screws in the lateral mass of C1 atlas. Sandhu et al 40 used ECD in sacro-iliac screw and found 100% stable and accurate fixation.…”

Section: Safety and Effectiveness Of The Modified Ecd Withmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spine Surgery with Electronic Conductivity Device: A Prospectively Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial and Literature Review

Zhai,

Li,

Chen

et al. 2023

Orthopaedic Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveImproving accuracy and safety of pedicle screw placement is of great clinical importance. Electronic conductivity device (ECD) can be a promising technique with features of affordability, portability, and real‐time detection capabilities. This study aimed to validate the safety and effectiveness of a modified ECD.MethodsThe ECD underwent a modification where six lamps of various colors, and it was utilized in a prospectively multicenter randomized controlled clinical trial involving 96 patients across three hospitals from June 2018 to December 2018. The trial incorporated a self‐control randomization with an equal distribution of left or right side of vertebral pedicle among two groups: the free‐hand group and the ECD group. A total of 496 pedicle screws were inserted, with 248 inserted in each group. The primary outcomes focused on the accuracy of pedicle screw placement and the frequency of intraoperative X‐rays. Meanwhile, the secondary indicator measured the time required for pedicle screw placement. Results were presented as means ± SD. Paired samples t‐test and χ2‐test were used for comparison. Furthermore, an updated review was conducted, which included studies published from 2006 onwards.ResultsBaseline patient characteristics were recorded. The primary accuracy outcome revealed a 96.77% accuracy rate in the ECD group, compared to a 95.16% accuracy rate in the free‐hand group, with no significant differences noted. In contrast, ECD demonstrated a significant reduction in radiation exposure frequency when compared to the free‐hand group (1.11 ± 0.32 vs. 1.30 ± 0.53; p < 0.001), resulting in a 14.6% reduction. Moreover, ECD displayed a decrease of 30.38% in insertion time (70.88 ± 30.51 vs. 101.82 ± 54.00 s; p < 0.001). According to the results of the 21 studies, ECD has been utilized in various areas of the spine such as the atlas, thoracic and lumbar spine, as well as sacral 2‐alar‐iliac. The accuracy of ECD ranged from 85% to 100%.ConclusionThe prospectively randomized trial and the review indicate that the use of ECD presents a secure and precise approach to the placement of pedicle screws, with the added benefit of reducing both procedure time and radiation exposure.

show abstract

Usefulness of a New Electronic Conductivity Device with a Pedicle Probe and a Multi-axis Angiography Unit for Inserting a C1 Lateral Mass Screw Safely and Tightly: A Technical Note

Cited by 2 publications

References 24 publications

Accuracy of Pedicle Screw Placement Comparing an Electronic Conductivity Device and a Multi-axis Angiography Unit with C-arm Fluoroscopy in Lumbar Fixation Surgery for Safety

Accuracy of Pedicle Screw Placement Comparing an Electronic Conductivity Device and a Multi-axis Angiography Unit with C-arm Fluoroscopy in Lumbar Fixation Surgery for Safety

Spine Surgery with Electronic Conductivity Device: A Prospectively Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial and Literature Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About