Zhejiang Spine Research Center, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Second Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical College, 109 Xueyuanxi Road, Wenzhou 325000, China.
Eur Spine J. 2011 Jun;20(6):846-59. doi: 10.1007/s00586-010-1577-5. Epub 2010 Sep 23.
Studies revealed that navigation systems that provided intraoperative assistance might improve pedicle screw insertion accuracy, and also implied that different systems provided different pedicle screw insertion accuracy. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to focus on the pedicle screw insertion accuracy with or without the assistance of image-guided system, and the variance among the different navigation systems. Comparative studies were searched on pedicle screw insertion accuracy between conventional and navigated method, and among different navigation systems. A total of 43 papers, including 28 clinical, 14 cadaveric and 1 model studies, were included in the current study. For clinical articles, there were 3 randomized clinical trials, 4 prospective comparative studies and 21 retrospective comparative studies. The incidence of pedicle violation among computer tomography-based navigation method group was statistically significantly less than that observed among the conventional group (OR 95% CI, in vivo: 0.32-0.60; in vitro: 0.24-0.75 P < 0.01). Two-dimensional fluoroscopy-based navigation system (OR 95% CI, in vivo: 0.27-0.48; in vitro: 0.43-0.88 P < 0.01) and three-dimension fluoroscopy-based navigation system (OR 95% CI, in vivo: 0.09-0.38; in vitro: 0.09-0.36 P < 0.01) also obtained significant reduced screw deviation rate over traditional methods. Between navigated approaches, statistically insignificant individual and pooled RR values were observed for all in vivo subgroups. Pooled estimate of in vitro studies show that computer tomography-based and three-dimension fluoroscopy-based navigation system provided more accurate pedicle screw insertion over two-dimension fluoroscopy-based navigation system. Our review showed that navigation provided a higher accuracy in the placement of pedicle screws compared with conventional methods. The superiority of navigation systems was obvious when they were applied to abnormal spinal structure. Although no strong in vivo evidence has detected significantly different pedicle screw placement accuracy among the three major navigation systems, meta-analysis revealed the variance in pedicle screw insertion accuracy with different navigation methods.
研究表明,术中辅助导航系统可能会提高椎弓根螺钉置入的准确性,并且不同的系统提供的椎弓根螺钉置入准确性也不同。本系统评价和荟萃分析主要关注有无影像引导系统辅助的椎弓根螺钉置入准确性,以及不同导航系统之间的差异。比较了传统方法和导航方法、不同导航系统之间椎弓根螺钉置入准确性的研究。共纳入 43 篇文献,包括 28 篇临床研究、14 篇尸体研究和 1 篇模型研究。对于临床文章,有 3 项随机临床试验、4 项前瞻性对照研究和 21 项回顾性对照研究。基于计算机断层扫描的导航方法组的椎弓根螺钉置入不当发生率明显低于传统组(OR 95%CI,体内:0.32-0.60;体外:0.24-0.75 P<0.01)。二维透视导航系统(OR 95%CI,体内:0.27-0.48;体外:0.43-0.88 P<0.01)和三维透视导航系统(OR 95%CI,体内:0.09-0.38;体外:0.09-0.36 P<0.01)也显著降低了传统方法的螺钉偏差率。在导航方法之间,所有体内亚组的个体和汇总 RR 值均无统计学意义。体外研究的汇总估计表明,与二维透视导航系统相比,基于计算机断层扫描和三维透视导航系统提供了更准确的椎弓根螺钉置入。本综述表明,与传统方法相比,导航在椎弓根螺钉放置方面具有更高的准确性。在应用于异常脊柱结构时,导航系统的优势更为明显。虽然没有强有力的体内证据表明三种主要导航系统在椎弓根螺钉放置准确性方面存在显著差异,但荟萃分析揭示了不同导航方法的椎弓根螺钉插入准确性的差异。