Aota Yoichi, Honda Atsushi, Saito Tomoyuki
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Yokohama City University Hospital, Yokohama City, Kanagawa Prefecture, Japan.
J Spinal Disord Tech. 2014 May;27(3):136-43. doi: 10.1097/BSD.0b013e31825bd24d.
A retrospective study comparing screw positioning and associated complications between 2 different facet screw placement methods.
To review the anatomic location, clinical safety, efficacy, and limitations of 2 facet screw placement techniques.
Facet screw fixation in the subaxial cervical spine penetrates 4 cortical layers and affords better stability than lateral mass screws. Takayasu and colleagues recommended placing screws in the sagittal plane. We modified the trajectory to direct the screws laterally from the sagittal plane to place the root at less risk and improve fixation by increasing the excursion of the screws into bone. No clinical reports exist describing the quadricortical facet screw placed in a lateral direction.
A total of 95 screws were used in 18 consecutive patients who underwent posterior cervical stabilization for various spinal disorders: 34 screws used sagittal plane screw placement and 61 used our technique. Screw-related complications were reviewed. Screw trajectories and screw tip positions related to the ventral cortical margin and vertebral artery were evaluated using postoperative 3-dimensional computed tomograms taken within 6 months after surgery. Instrumentation failures were evaluated from postoperative 3-dimensional computed tomograms taken 2 years after surgery.
There was 1 complication, nerve root irritation due to screw malposition. Postoperative computed tomographic images revealed that drilling was 30 degrees lateral from the sagittal plane in our method. Fourth cortex penetration failed in 29% of the screws placed in the sagittal plane and in 5% by our method. Screw loosening was significantly increased using screws placed in the sagittal plane (24% vs. 2%).
Quadricortical facet screw placement aimed at the juncture between the transverse process and the facet is practicable. Screw loosening was significantly reduced using this lateral screw direction. One of the disadvantages of this technique is that extensive cranial exposure is required to align the instruments in the proper sagittal trajectory.
一项回顾性研究,比较两种不同小关节螺钉置入方法的螺钉定位及相关并发症。
回顾两种小关节螺钉置入技术的解剖位置、临床安全性、有效性及局限性。
下颈椎小关节螺钉固定穿透4层皮质骨,比侧块螺钉提供更好的稳定性。高田及其同事建议在矢状面置入螺钉。我们修改了轨迹,使螺钉从矢状面向外侧置入,以降低神经根风险,并通过增加螺钉进入骨质的行程来改善固定。尚无临床报告描述向外侧置入的四皮质小关节螺钉。
18例因各种脊柱疾病接受后路颈椎稳定手术的患者共使用了95枚螺钉:34枚采用矢状面螺钉置入,61枚采用我们的技术。回顾螺钉相关并发症。使用术后6个月内拍摄的三维计算机断层扫描评估螺钉轨迹及螺钉尖端与腹侧皮质边缘和椎动脉的位置关系。从术后2年拍摄的三维计算机断层扫描评估内固定失败情况。
发生1例并发症,因螺钉位置不当导致神经根刺激。术后计算机断层扫描图像显示,我们的方法中钻孔在矢状面外侧30度。矢状面置入的螺钉有29%未能穿透第四层皮质骨,而我们的方法为5%。矢状面置入螺钉时螺钉松动明显增加(24%对2%)。
针对横突与小关节交界处的四皮质小关节螺钉置入是可行的。采用这种外侧螺钉方向可显著减少螺钉松动。该技术的缺点之一是需要广泛的颅骨暴露以将器械调整到合适的矢状轨迹。