Anatomical Considerations for Subaxial (C2) Pedicle Screw Placement A Radiographic Study With Computed Tomography in 93 Patients

被引:30
|
作者
Smith, Zachary A. [1 ,2 ]
Bistazzoni, Simona [1 ,2 ]
Onibokun, Adebukoa [1 ,2 ]
Chen, Nan-Fu [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Sassi, Marco [1 ,2 ]
Khoo, Larry T. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Calif Los Angeles, Santa Monica Spine Ctr, Los Angeles, CA 90095 USA
[2] Univ Calif Los Angeles, Dept Neurol Surg, Los Angeles, CA USA
[3] Kaohsiung Armed Forces Gen Hosp, Div Neurosurg, Kaohsiung, Taiwan
来源
JOURNAL OF SPINAL DISORDERS & TECHNIQUES | 2010年 / 23卷 / 03期
关键词
axis; C2; pedicle; computed tomography; FIXATION; AXIS; FUSION;
D O I
10.1097/BSD.0b013e3181b40234
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Study Design: Radiographic study. Objective: More detailed anatomical knowledge of the C2 pedicle is required to optimize and minimize the risk of screw placement. The aim of this study was to evaluate the linear and angular dimensions of the true C2 pedicle using axial computed tomography. Background Data: Although earlier studies have analyzed the anatomy of the C2 pars interarticularis, little attention has been focused on the dimensions of the C2 pedicle. Methods: Ninety-three patients (47 males, 46 females; mean age 48.4 y) who had previous cervical spinal computed tomography imaging were evaluated for this study. Axial images of the C2 pedicle were selected and the following pedicle parameters were determined: pedicle width (the mediolateral diameter of the pedicle isthmus, perpendicular to the pedicle axis) and pedicle transverse angle (PTA, ie, the angle between the pedicle axis and the midline of the vertebral body). Results: The overall mean pedicle width was 5.8 +/- 1.2 mm. The mean pedicle width in male patients (6.0 +/- 1.3 mm) was greater than that in the female patients (5.6 +/- 1.1 mm). This difference was not found to be statistically significant (P = 0.679). The overall mean PTA was 43.9 +/- 3.9 degrees. The mean PTA in male patients was 43.2 +/- 3.8 degrees, whereas that in female patients was 44.7 +/- 3.7 degrees. Conclusions: Given the significant variability in pedicle widths and the need for precise trajectory planning in pedicle cannulation, preoperative planning is absolutely mandatory. A significant percentage of patients have pedicle widths that may not accommodate screw fixation. In addition, the angle of entry into the C2 pedicle must be carefully measured for safe instrumentation at this level.
引用
收藏
页码:176 / 179
页数:4
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Computed-tomography-based anatomical study to assess feasibility of pedicle screw placement in the lumbar and lower thoracic pediatric spine
    Shaikh, Kashif A.
    Bennett, Garrett M.
    White, Ian K.
    Bullis, Carli L.
    Fulkerson, Daniel H.
    CHILDS NERVOUS SYSTEM, 2012, 28 (10) : 1743 - 1754
  • [22] Characteristics and Comparisons of Morphometric Measurements and Computed Tomography Hounsfield Unit Values of C2 Laminae for Translaminar Screw Placement Between Patients With and Without Basilar Invagination
    Zhou, Lu-Ping
    Shang, Jin
    Zhang, Zhi-Gang
    Jiang, Zhen-Fei
    Zhang, Hua-Qing
    Jia, Chong-Yu
    Zhang, Ren-Jie
    Shen, Cai-Liang
    NEUROSPINE, 2022, 19 (04) : 899 - +
  • [23] Correlation between computed tomography measurements and direct anatomic measurements of the axis for consideration of C2 laminar screw placement
    Dean, Clayton L.
    Lee, Michael J.
    Robbin, Mark
    Cassinelli, Ezequiel H.
    SPINE JOURNAL, 2009, 9 (03) : 258 - 262
  • [24] Anatomical analysis of the C2 pedicle in patients with basilar invagination
    Xiao, Ruipei
    Hou, Juedong
    Zhou, Yang
    Zheng, Jintao
    Zou, Xiaobao
    Zhu, Yongjian
    Yao, Ling
    Ma, Xiangyang
    Chen, Jianting
    Yang, Jincheng
    EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2022, 31 (10) : 2684 - 2692
  • [25] The summit of the isthmic crest of the axis as a new entry point for C2 pedicle screw: an anatomical study
    Beucler, Nathan
    NEUROSURGICAL REVIEW, 2024, 47 (01)
  • [26] Safety and accuracy of freehand versus navigated C2 pars or pedicle screw placement
    Hlubek, Randall J.
    Bohl, Michael A.
    Cole, Tyler S.
    Morgan, Clinton D.
    Xu, David S.
    Chang, Steve W.
    Turner, Jay D.
    Kakarla, U. Kumar
    SPINE JOURNAL, 2018, 18 (08) : 1374 - 1381
  • [27] Accuracy and safety of C2 pedicle or pars screw placement: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Azimi, Parisa
    Yazdanian, Taravat
    Benzel, Edward C.
    Aghaei, Hossein Nayeb
    Azhari, Shirzad
    Sadeghi, Sohrab
    Montazeri, Ali
    JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY AND RESEARCH, 2020, 15 (01)
  • [28] Ideal starting point and trajectory for C2 pedicle screw placement: a 3D computed tomography analysis using perioperative measurements
    Chin, Kingsley R.
    Mills, Michael V.
    Seale, Jason
    Cumming, Vanessa
    SPINE JOURNAL, 2014, 14 (04) : 615 - 618
  • [29] Determining C2 Pedicle Screw Placement Feasibility in the Pediatric Population: A Computed Tomographic Safe Zone Analysis
    Hirase, Takashi
    Wu Zhuge
    Phelps, Christopher, I
    Kushwaha, Vivek P.
    Marco, Rex A. W.
    JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC ORTHOPAEDICS, 2021, 41 (09) : 580 - 584
  • [30] Computed-tomography-based anatomical study to assess feasibility of pedicle screw placement in the lumbar and lower thoracic pediatric spine
    Kashif A. Shaikh
    Garrett M. Bennett
    Ian K. White
    Carli L. Bullis
    Daniel H. Fulkerson
    Child's Nervous System, 2012, 28 : 1743 - 1754