Advertisement

Skeletal Radiology

, Volume 40, Issue 12, pp 1595–1601 | Cite as

Interventional spinal procedures guided and controlled by a 3D rotational angiographic unit

  • Alessandro PedicelliEmail author
  • Tommaso Verdolotti
  • Angelo Pompucci
  • Flora Desiderio
  • Francesco D’Argento
  • Cesare Colosimo
  • Lorenzo Bonomo
Technical Report

Abstract

Objective

The aim of this paper is to demonstrate the usefulness of 2D multiplanar reformatting images (MPR) obtained from rotational acquisitions with cone-beam computed tomography technology during percutaneous extra-vascular spinal procedures performed in the angiography suite.

Methods

We used a 3D rotational angiographic unit with a flat panel detector. MPR images were obtained from a rotational acquisition of 8 s (240 images at 30 fps), tube rotation of 180° and after post-processing of 5 s by a local work-station. Multislice CT (MSCT) is the best guidance system for spinal approaches permitting direct tomographic visualization of each spinal structure. Many operators, however, are trained with fluoroscopy, it is less expensive, allows real-time guidance, and in many centers the angiography suite is more frequently available for percutaneous procedures. We present our 6-year experience in fluoroscopy-guided spinal procedures, which were performed under different conditions using MPR images. We illustrate cases of vertebroplasty, epidural injections, selective foraminal nerve root block, facet block, percutaneous treatment of disc herniation and spine biopsy, all performed with the help of MPR images for guidance and control in the event of difficult or anatomically complex access.

Results and conclusion

The integrated use of “CT-like” MPR images allows the execution of spinal procedures under fluoroscopy guidance alone in all cases of dorso-lumbar access, with evident limitation of risks and complications, and without need for recourse to MSCT guidance, thus eliminating CT-room time (often bearing high diagnostic charges), and avoiding organizational problems for procedures that need, for example, combined use of a C-arm in the CT room.

Keywords

Vertebroplasty  Spine Interventional radiology Fluoroscopy Three-dimensional imaging Pain therapy 

Notes

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no financial involvement or commercial interest in the product discussed in the paper.

References

  1. 1.
    Orth RC, Wallace MJ, Kuo MD. C-arm cone-beam CT: general principles and technical considerations for use in interventional radiology. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2008;19(6):814–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gupta R, Grasruck M, Suess C, et al. Ultra-high resolution flat-panel volume CT: fundamental principles, design architecture, and system characterization. Eur Radiol. 2006;16(6):1191–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Powell MF, DiNobile D, Reddy AS. C-arm fluoroscopic cone beam CT for guidance of minimally invasive spine interventions. Pain Physician. 2010;13(1):51–9.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fenton DS, Czervionke LF. Image-guided spine intervention. Philadelphia: Saunders (Elsevier); 2003. p. 23.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wallace MJ, Kuo MD, Glaiberman C. Three-dimensional C-arm cone-beam CT: applications in the interventional suite. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2008;19:799–813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hodek-Wuerz R, Martin JB, Wilhelm K, et al. Percutaneous vertebroplasty: preliminary experiences with rotational acquisitions and 3D reconstructions for therapy control. Cardiovasc Interv Radiol. 2006;29:862–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pedicelli A, Rollo M, Piano M, et al. Percutaneous vertebroplasty with a high-quality rotational angiographic unit. Eur J Radiol. 2009;69(2):289–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gangi A, Kastler BA, Dietemann JL. Percutaneous vertebroplasty guided by a combination of CT and fluoroscopy. Am J Neuroradiol. 1994;15:83–6.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Carlson SK, Bender CE, Classic KL, et al. Benefits and safety of CT fluoroscopy in interventional radiologic procedures. Radiology. 2001;219:515–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Braak SJ, van Strijen MJ, van Leersum M, et al. Real-time 3D fluoroscopy guidance during needle interventions: technique, accuracy, and feasibility. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;194(5):W445–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Busser WM, Hoogeveen YL, Veth RP, et al. Percutaneous radiofrequency ablation of osteoid osteomas with use of real-time needle guidance for accurate needle placement: a pilot study. Cardiovasc Interv Radiol. 2011;34(1):180–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kim JH, Park KS, Yi S, et al. Real-time CT fluoroscopy (CTF)-guided vertebroplasty in osteoporotic spine fractures. Yonsei Med J. 2005;46(5):635–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gangi A, Guth S, Imbert JP, et al. Percutaneous vertebroplasty: indications, technique, and results. Radiographics. 2003;23:e10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Daly B, Templeton PA. Real-time CT fluoroscopy: evolution of an interventional tool. Radiology. 1999;211:309–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hott JS, Papadopoulos SM, Theodore N, et al. Intraoperative Iso-C C-arm navigation in cervical spinal surgery: review of the first 52 cases. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2004;29(24):2856–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tam A, Mohamed A, Pfister M, et al. C-arm cone beam computed tomographic needle path overlay for fluoroscopic-guided placement of translumbar central venous catheters. Cardiovasc Interv Radiol. 2009;32(4):820–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tam A, Mohamed A, Pfister M, et al. C-arm cone beam computed tomography needle. Path overlay for fluoroscopic guided vertebroplasty. Spine. 2010;35(10):1095–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Söderman M, Babic D, Holmin S, et al. Brain imaging with a flat detector C-arm: technique and clinical interest of XperCT. Neuroradiology. 2008;50(10):863–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Knight JR, Heran M, Munk PL, et al. C-arm cone-beam CT: applications for spinal cement augmentation demonstrated by three cases. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2008;19(7):1118–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© ISS 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alessandro Pedicelli
    • 1
    • 3
    Email author
  • Tommaso Verdolotti
    • 1
  • Angelo Pompucci
    • 2
  • Flora Desiderio
    • 1
  • Francesco D’Argento
    • 1
  • Cesare Colosimo
    • 1
  • Lorenzo Bonomo
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Bioimaging and Radiological SciencesCatholic University of Rome, A.Gemelli HospitalRomeItaly
  2. 2.Department of NeurotraumatologyCatholic University of Rome, A.Gemelli HospitalRomeItaly
  3. 3.Dipartimento di Bioimmagini e Scienze RadiologicheUniversità Cattolica di Roma, Policl. A.GemelliRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations