The Accuracy and Effectiveness of Automatic Pedicle Screw Trajectory Planning Based on Computer Tomography Values: an in Vitro Osteoporosis Model Study

Overview

Journal BMC Musculoskelet Disord

Publisher Biomed Central

Specialties Orthopedics
Physiology

Date 2022 Feb 22

PMID 35189892

Authors

Jia Bin Liu

Rui Zuo

Wen Jie Zheng

Chang Qing Li

Chao Zhang

Yue Zhou

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Pedicle screw placement in patients with osteoporosis is a serious clinical challenge. The bone mineral density (BMD) of the screw trajectory has been positively correlated with the screw pull-out force, while the computer tomography (CT) value has been linearly correlated with the BMD. The purpose of this study was to establish an in vitro osteoporosis model and verify the accuracy and effectiveness of automated pedicle screw planning software based on CT values in this model.

Methods: Ten vertebrae (L1-L5) of normal adult pigs were randomly divided into decalcification and control groups. In the decalcification group, the vertebral bodies were decalcified with Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) to construct an in vitro osteoporosis model. In the decalcification group, automatic planning (AP) and conventional manual planning (MP) were used to plan the pedicle screw trajectory on the left and right sides of the pedicle, respectively, and MP was used on both sides of the control group. CT values of trajectories obtained by the two methods were measured and compared. Then, 3D-printed guide plates were designed to assist pedicle screw placement. Finally, the pull-out force of the trajectory obtained by the two methods was measured.

Results: After decalcification, the BMD of the vertebra decreased from - 0.03 ± 1.03 to - 3.03 ± 0.29 (P < 0.05). In the decalcification group, the MP trajectory CT value was 2167.28 ± 65.62 Hu, the AP trajectory CT value was 2723.96 ± 165.83 Hu, and the MP trajectory CT value in the control group was 2242.94 ± 25.80 Hu (P < 0.05). In the decalcified vertebrae, the screw pull-out force of the MP group was 48.6% lower than that of the control group (P < 0.05). The pull-out force of the AP trajectory was 44.7% higher than that of the MP trajectory (P < 0.05) and reached 97.4% of the MP trajectory in the control group (P > 0.05).

Conclusion: Automatic planning of the pedicle screw trajectory based on the CT value can obtain a higher screw pull-out force, which is a valuable new method of pedicle screw placement in osteoporotic vertebre.

Citing Articles

A user-friendly system for identifying the optimal insertion direction and to choose the best pedicle screws for patient-specific spine surgery.

Magliano A, Naddeo F, Naddeo A Heliyon. 2024; 10(4):e26334.

PMID: 38404767 PMC: 10884480. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e26334.

Biomechanical evaluation of a novel minimally invasive pedicle bone cement screw applied to the treatment of Kümmel's disease in porcine vertebrae.

Ma X, Feng Q, Zhang X, Sun X, Lin L, Guo L Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2023; 11:1218478.

PMID: 37476480 PMC: 10354293. DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2023.1218478.

References

Lehman Jr R, Polly Jr D, Kuklo T, Cunningham B, Kirk K, Belmont Jr P . Straight-forward versus anatomic trajectory technique of thoracic pedicle screw fixation: a biomechanical analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003; 28(18):2058-65. DOI: 10.1097/01.BRS.0000087743.57439.4F. View

Cody D, Gross G, Hou F, Spencer H, Goldstein S, Fyhrie D . Femoral strength is better predicted by finite element models than QCT and DXA. J Biomech. 1999; 32(10):1013-20. DOI: 10.1016/s0021-9290(99)00099-8. View

Rho J, Hobatho M, Ashman R . Relations of mechanical properties to density and CT numbers in human bone. Med Eng Phys. 1995; 17(5):347-55. DOI: 10.1016/1350-4533(95)97314-f. View

Carter D, Hayes W . The compressive behavior of bone as a two-phase porous structure. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1977; 59(7):954-62. View

Goerres J, Uneri A, De Silva T, Ketcha M, Reaungamornrat S, Jacobson M . Spinal pedicle screw planning using deformable atlas registration. Phys Med Biol. 2017; 62(7):2871-2891. PMC: 9148916. DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/aa5f42. View

Lee J, Kim S, Kim Y, Chung W . Optimal surgical planning guidance for lumbar spinal fusion considering operational safety and vertebra-screw interface strength. Int J Med Robot. 2012; 8(3):261-72. DOI: 10.1002/rcs.1413. View

Knez D, Likar B, Pernus F, Vrtovec T . Computer-Assisted Screw Size and Insertion Trajectory Planning for Pedicle Screw Placement Surgery. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2016; 35(6):1420-30. DOI: 10.1109/TMI.2016.2514530. View

Jain P, Rana M, Biswas J, Khan M . Biomechanics of spinal implants-a review. Biomed Phys Eng Express. 2021; 6(4):042002. DOI: 10.1088/2057-1976/ab9dd2. View

Okuyama K, Abe E, Suzuki T, Tamura Y, Chiba M, Sato K . Influence of bone mineral density on pedicle screw fixation: a study of pedicle screw fixation augmenting posterior lumbar interbody fusion in elderly patients. Spine J. 2003; 1(6):402-7. DOI: 10.1016/s1529-9430(01)00078-x. View

10.

Trost M, Schmoelz W, Wimmer D, Hormann R, Frey S, Schulte T . Local osteo-enhancement of osteoporotic vertebra with a triphasic bone implant material increases strength-a biomechanical study. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2020; 140(10):1395-1401. PMC: 7505880. DOI: 10.1007/s00402-020-03382-x. View

11.

Knez D, Mohar J, Cirman R, Likar B, Pernus F, Vrtovec T . Variability Analysis of Manual and Computer-Assisted Preoperative Thoracic Pedicle Screw Placement Planning. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2018; 43(21):1487-1495. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000002659. View

12.

Ruffoni D, Wirth A, Steiner J, Parkinson I, Muller R, van Lenthe G . The different contributions of cortical and trabecular bone to implant anchorage in a human vertebra. Bone. 2011; 50(3):733-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.bone.2011.11.027. View

13.

Kueny R, Kolb J, Lehmann W, Puschel K, Morlock M, Huber G . Influence of the screw augmentation technique and a diameter increase on pedicle screw fixation in the osteoporotic spine: pullout versus fatigue testing. Eur Spine J. 2014; 23(10):2196-202. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-014-3476-7. View

14.

Schorlemmer S, Ignatius A, Claes L, Augat P . Inhibition of cortical and cancellous bone formation in glucocorticoid-treated OVX sheep. Bone. 2005; 37(4):491-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.bone.2005.05.002. View

15.

Lai D, Shih Y, Chen Y, Chien A, Wang J . Effect of pedicle screw diameter on screw fixation efficacy in human osteoporotic thoracic vertebrae. J Biomech. 2017; 70:196-203. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2017.10.009. View

16.

Guha D, Jakubovic R, Gupta S, Alotaibi N, Cadotte D, da Costa L . Spinal intraoperative three-dimensional navigation: correlation between clinical and absolute engineering accuracy. Spine J. 2016; 17(4):489-498. DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2016.10.020. View

17.

Vijayan R, De Silva T, Han R, Zhang X, Uneri A, Doerr S . Automatic pedicle screw planning using atlas-based registration of anatomy and reference trajectories. Phys Med Biol. 2019; 64(16):165020. PMC: 8650759. DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ab2d66. View

18.

Teoh S, Chui C . Bone material properties and fracture analysis: needle insertion for spinal surgery. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2009; 1(2):115-39. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2007.06.004. View

19.

Zhuang X, Yu B, Zheng Z, Zhang J, Lu W . Effect of the degree of osteoporosis on the biomechanical anchoring strength of the sacral pedicle screws: an in vitro comparison between unaugmented bicortical screws and polymethylmethacrylate augmented unicortical screws. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010; 35(19):E925-31. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181c5fb21. View

20.

Lee C, Chan S, Lai H, Lee S . A method to develop an in vitro osteoporosis model of porcine vertebrae: histological and biomechanical study. J Neurosurg Spine. 2011; 14(6):789-98. DOI: 10.3171/2010.12.SPINE10453. View