Zusammenfassung
Hintergrund
Die spinale Navigation hat im Verlauf der letzten zwei Jahrzehnte erhebliche Fortschritte gemacht. Nach ersten Erfahrungen mit Pedikelschrauben in der Lendenwirbelsäule (LWS) und Brustwirbelsäule (BWS) haben die technologischen Verbesserungen zu einer vermehrten Anwendung im Bereich der Halswirbelsäule geführt. Operative Techniken, wie zervikale Pedikelschrauben, Massa-lateralis-Schrauben im Halswirbelkörper (HWK) 1 und transartikuläre C1/C2-Schrauben haben sich mithilfe der Navigation als Standardverfahren etabliert. Die verschiedenen Techniken der spinalen Navigation unterscheiden sich anhand des bildgebenden Datensatzes.
Technik
An der Halswirbelsäule (HWS) ist die präoperative Computertomographie (CT) mit der Notwendigkeit des intraoperativen Matchings aufgrund der hohen Bildqualität immer noch der klinische Standard. Die BV-basierte 3‑D-Navigation hat in den letzten Jahren eine breite Anwendung an der LWS gefunden, ist aber an der HWS bei komplexen anatomischen Verhältnissen sowie in den Übergangsregionen aufgrund der schlechteren Bildqualität nur eingeschränkt einsetzbar. Die zukünftige Verfügbarkeit der intraoperativen CT (iCT) kombiniert die Vorteile der hohen Bildqualität mit den Vorteilen der intraoperativen Bildakquise. Dies wird zu einer weiteren Verbreitung der spinalen Navigation an der HWS führen und zukünftig auch minimalinvasive Techniken mit hoher Präzision ermöglichen.
Anwendung
Die erfolgreiche Anwendung der spinalen Navigation basiert auf der Kenntnis der technischen Grundlagen und einen routinemäßigen Einsatz im klinischen Alltag. Nur mit ausreichender Erfahrung des Operationsteams lassen sich die Arbeitsabläufe optimieren, was dann neben der erhöhten Sicherheit auch zu einer Reduktion der Strahlenbelastung und Verkürzung der Operationszeiten führt.
Abstract
Background
Spinal navigation has made significant advances in the last two decades. After initial experiences with pedicle screws in the thoracic and lumbar spine, technological improvements have resulted in their increased application in the cervical spine. Instrumentation techniques like cervical pedicle screws, lateral mass screws in C1 and transarticular screws C1/C2 have become standard due to the application of image guidance.
Technique
Different navigation techniques can be distinguished based on the type of imaging. In the cervical spine, the preoperative computer tomography (CT) scan that requires intraoperative matching is still the standard of care due to the high image quality. 3D fluoroscopy navigation techniques are currently widely used in the lumbar spine, but the reduced image quality obviates the application in the more sophisticated cervical anatomy or the cervicothoracic region. The future availability of intraoperative CT scans (iCT) combines the advantages of high image quality with those of intraoperative image acquisition. This will lead to a wider use of image guidance in the cervical spine and will enable the surgeon to apply minimally invasive techniques with higher accuracy.
Application
The successful application of spinal navigation is based on the technical knowledge of navigation systems and its exercise in daily routine. Only the sufficient experience of the clinical staff makes it possible to standardize operational procedures to increase patient safety, reduce radiation dose and shorten operation time.
Abbreviations
- BV:
-
Bildverstärker
- BWS:
-
Brustwirbelsäule
- CCÜ:
-
Kraniozervikaler Übergang
- CT:
-
Computertomographie
- DRB:
-
Dynamische Referenzklemme
- HWK:
-
Halswirbelkörper
- HWS:
-
Halswirbelsäule
- iCT:
-
Intraoperative CT
- LWS:
-
Lendenwirbelsäule
- MRT:
-
Magnetresonanztomographie
- SAS:
-
Subaxiale Instabilität
- VT:
-
Vertikale Translokation
Literatur
Abumi K, Ito H, Taneichi H, Kaneda K (1994) Transpedicular screw fixation for traumatic lesions of the middle and lower cervical spine: description of the techniques and preliminary report. J Spinal Disord 7:17–12
Al Barbarawi MM, Allouh MZ (2015) Cervical lateral mass screw-rod fixation: surgical experience with 2500 consecutive screws, an analytical review, and long-term outcomes. Br J Neurosurg 29:699–704
Amiot L‑P, Labelle H, DeGuise JA et al (1995) Computer-assisted pedicle screw fixation. A feasibility study. Spine 20:1208–1212
Bydon M, Xu R, Amin AG et al (2014) Safety and efficacy of pedicle screw placement using intraoperative computed tomography: consecutive series of 1148 pedicle screws. J Neurosurg Spine 21:320–328
Costa F, Ortolina A, Attuati L et al (2015) Management of C1–2 traumatic fractures using an intraoperative 3D imaging-based navigation system. J Neurosurg Spine 22:128–133
Dea N, Fisher CG, Batke J et al (2016) Economic evaluation comparing intraoperative cone beam CT-based navigation and conventional fluoroscopy for the placement of spinal pedicle screws: a patient-level data cost-effectiveness analysis. Spine J 16:23–31
Dewey P, Incoll I (1998) Evaluation of thyroid shields for reduction of radiation exposure to orthopaedic surgeons. Aust N Z J Surg 68:635–636
Gebhard FT, Kraus MD, Schneider E et al (2006) Does computer-assisted spine surgery reduce intraoperative radiation doses? Spine 31:2024–2027
Guha D, Jakubovic R, Gupta S et al (2017) Spinal intraoperative three dimensional navigation: correlation between clinical and absolute engineering accuracy. Spine J 17:489–498
Guppy KH, Chakrabarti I, Banerjee A (2014) The use of intraoperative navigation for complex upper cervical spine surgery. Neurosurg Focus 36:E5
Holly LT, Foley KT (2003) Intraoperative spinal navigation. Spine 28:S54–S61
Hott JS, Papadopoulos SM, Theodore N et al (2004) Intraoperative Iso-C C‑arm navigation in cervical spine surgery. Review of the first 52 cases. Spine 29:2856–2860
Ishikawa Y, Kanemura T, Yoshida G et al (2012) Intraoperative, full rotation, three-dimensional image (O-arm)-based navigation system for cervical pedicle screw insertion. J Neurosurg Spine 15:472–478
Jeanneret B, Gebhard JS, Magerl F (1994) Transpedicular screw fixation of articular mass fracture-separation: results of an anatomical study and operative technique. J Spinal Disord 7(1):222–229
Kothe R, Rüther W, Schneider E et al (2004) Biomechanical analysis of transpedicular screw fixation in the subaxial cervical spine. Spine 29:1869–1875
Kovanda TJ, Ansari SF, Qaiser R et al (2015) Feasibility of CT-based intraoperative 3D stereotactic image-guided navigation in the upper cervical spine of children 10 years of age or younger: initial experience. J Neurosurg Pediatr 16:590–598
Laine T, Schlenzka D, Makitalo K et al (1997) Improved accuracy of pedicle screw insertion with computer-assisted surgery. A prospective clinical trial of 30 patients. Spine 22:1254–1258
Ludwig SC, Kowalski JM, Edwards CC et al (2000) Cervical pedicle screws. Comparative accuracy of two insertion techniques. Spine 25:2675–2681
Ludwig SC, Kramer DL, Balderston RA et al (2000) Placement of pedicle screws in the human cadaveric cervical spine. Comparative accuracy of three techniques. Spine 25:1655–1667
Mac-Thiong J‑M, Parent S, Poitras B et al (2013) Neurological outcome and management of pedicle screws misplaced totally within the spinal canal. Spine 38:229–237
Manbachi A, Cobbold RS, Ginsberg HJ (2014) Guided pedicle screw insertion: techniques and training. Spine J 14:165–179
Mason A, Paulsen R, Babuska JM et al (2014) The accuracy of pedicle screw placement using image guidance systems. A systematic review. J Neurosurg Spine 20:196–203
Mastrangelo G, Fedeli U, Fadda E et al (2005) Increased cancer risk among surgeons in an orthopaedic hospital. Occup Med (lond) 55:498–500
Mendelsohn D, Strelzow J, Dea N et al (2016) Patient and surgeon radiation exposure during spinal instrumentation using intraoperative computed tomography-based navigation. Spine J 16:343–354
Navarro-Ramirez R, Lang G, Lian X et al (2017) Total navigation in spine surgery ; a concise guide to elminate fluoroscopy using a intraoperative computed tomography 3‑dimensional navigation system. World Neurosurg 100:325–335
Nolte L‑P, Zamorano LJ, Jiang Z et al (1995) Image-guided insertion of transpedicular screws. A laboratory set-up. Spine 20:497–500
Nottmeier EW, Pirris SM, Edwards S et al (2013) Operating room radiation exposure in cone beam computed tomography—based, image-guided spinal surgery. J Neurosurg Spine 19:226–231
Pisapia JM, Nayak NR, Salinas RD et al (2017) Navigated odontoid screw placement using the O‑arm: technical note and case series. J Neurosurg Spine 26:10–18
Rampersaud YR, Foley KT, Shen AC et al (2000) Radiation exposure of the spine surgeon during fluoroscopically assisted pedicle screw insertion. Spine 25:2637–2645
Rahmathulla G, Nottmeier E, Pirris SM et al (2014) Intraoperative image-guided spinal navigation: technical pitfalls and their avoidance. Neurosurg Focus 36:E3
Richter M, Cakir B, Schmidt R (2005) Cervical pedicle screws: conventional versus computer-assisted placement of cannulated screws. Spine 30:2280–2287
Richter M, Mattes T, Cakir B (2004) Computer-assisted posterior instrumentation of the cervical and cervico-thoracic spine. Eur Spine J 13:50–59
Richter M, Schmidt R, Claes L (2002) Posterior atlantoaxial fixation. Biomechanical comparison of six different techniques. Spine 27:1724–1732
Richter M, Amiot L‑P, Neller S et al (2000) Computer-assisted surgery in posterior instrumentation of the cervical spine: an in-vitro feasibility study. Eur Spine J 9:S65–S70
Schmidt R, Wilke H‑J, Claes L et al (2003) Pedicle screws enhance primary stability in multilevel cervical corporectomies: biomechanical in vitro comparison of different implants including constrained and nonconstrained posteriorinstrumentations. Spine 28:1821–1822
Shimokawa N, Takami T (2017) Surgical safety of pedicle screw placement with computer navigation system. Neurosurg Rev 40:251–258
Shin BJ, James AR, Njoku IU et al (2012) Pedicle screw navigation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of perforation risk for computer-navigated versus freehand insertion. J Neurosurg Spine 17:113–122
Tian N‑F (2009) Image guided pedicle screw insertion accuracy: a meta-analysis. Int Orthop 33:895–903
Tjardes T, Shafizadeh S, Rixen D et al (2010) Image guided surgery: state of the art and future directions. Eur Spine J 19:25–45
Uehara M, Takahashi J, Ikegami S et al (2014) Screw perforation features in 129 consecutive patients performed computer-guided cervical pedicle screw insertion. Eur Spine J 23:2189–2195
Villard J, Ryang Y‑M, Demetriades AK et al (2014) Radiation exposure to the surgeon and the patient during posterior lumbar spinal instrumentation. Spine 39:1004–1009
Weidner A, Wähler M, Chiu ST et al (2000) Modification of C1–C2 transarticular screw fixation by image-guided surgery. Spine 25:2668–2674
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Interessenkonflikt
M. Richter gibt an, dass er Autor eines zervikalen Implantatsystems der Firma Ulrich Medical, Ulm, Deutschland (Neon 2/3) ist und Lizenzgebühren erhält. Er erhält Beratungs- und Vortragshonorare von der Firma Brainlab, München. R. Kothe gibt an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.
Dieser Beitrag beinhaltet keine von den Autoren durchgeführten Studien an Menschen oder Tieren.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kothe, R., Richter, M. Relevanz der spinalen Navigation in der rekonstruktiven Halswirbelsäulenchirurgie. Orthopäde 47, 518–525 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00132-018-3568-x
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00132-018-3568-x