Radiological study of different sacral S1 screw trajectories based on the anatomical parameters of the Chinese population

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-7795.2021.04.023

Abstract

Abstract: Objective To describe and compare the radiological parameters of S1 pedicle screw (PS), S1 cortical screw (CS)and sacral alar screw (SAS) utilizing the three-dimensional reconstruction of sacralcomputed tomography (CT) scan data. Methods The CT data of Chinese patients with non-orthopedic diseases who received three-dimensional CT scan of the lumbosacral segment from January 2019 to December 2019 in our hospital will be collected. A total of 42 patients were obtained, including 20 males and 22 females, with an average age of (55.14±8.35) years old. To import all CT data into MIMICS software for three-dimensional reconstruction, and measure the maximum length, transverse angle (TA), sagittal angle (SA), and average CT value of S1 SAS, CS, and PS trajectory will be done. Results The TA of the longest S1 SAS is (63.51±8.68)°, the SA is(36.62±10.97)°, the length is (41.74±3.33)mm; the TA of the longest S1 CS is about (5.62±3.69)°, the SA is about (6.60±4.88)°, the length is (31.60±4.23)mm; the TA of the longest S1 PS is (29.42±3.89)°, the SA is (15.60±6.58)°, and the length is (48.12±5.44)mm. The length of S1 PS was significantly longer than that of SAS and CS, and the average CT value of SAS was significantly higher than that of PS, but the CT value in the midpoint of SAS trajectory was significantly lower than that of CS and PS. Conclusion It is feasible for S1 sacral alar screw to be used in sacral fixation. The length of screw trajectory is longer than that of cortical screw in the same segment, and the average CT value of screw trajectory is higher than that of pedicle screw, which can be used as one of the alternatives for short segment lumbosacral fixation. However, biomechanical studies are needed to further verify the results.

Key words: radiological measurement, lumbosacral fixation, sacral alar screw, cortical screw, pedicle screw

CLC Number:

R681

Ding Hongtao, Liu Yuzeng, Hai Yong, Guan Li, Pan Aixing, Zhang Xinuo, Han Bo, Li Yue. Radiological study of different sacral S1 screw trajectories based on the anatomical parameters of the Chinese population[J]. Journal of Capital Medical University, 2021, 42(4): 653-659.

0
/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Reference Manager|ProCite|BibTeX|RefWorks

URL: https://journal03.magtech.org.cn/Jweb_sdykdxxb/EN/10.3969/j.issn.1006-7795.2021.04.023

https://journal03.magtech.org.cn/Jweb_sdykdxxb/EN/Y2021/V42/I4/653

References

[1] Panjabi M M, White A R. Basic biomechanics of the spine[J]. Neurosurgery, 1980,7(1):76-93.
[2] Wang T, Liu H, Zheng Z, et al. Biomechanical effect of 4-rod technique on lumbosacral fixation: an in vitro human cadaveric investigation[J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2013,38(15):E925-E929.
[3] Kim Y J, Bridwell K H, Lenke L G, et al. Pseudarthrosis in adult spinal deformity following multisegmental instrumentation and arthrodesis[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2006,88(4):721-728.
[4] Jain A, Kebaish K M, Sponseller P D. Sacral-alar-iliac fixation in pediatric deformity: radiographic outcomes and complications[J]. Spine Deform, 2016,4(3):225-229.
[5] Hasan M Y, Liu G, Wong H K, et al. Postoperative complications of S2AI versus iliac screw in spinopelvic fixation: a Meta-analysis and recent trends review[J]. Spine J, 2020,20(6):964-972.
[6] Ilyas H, Place H, Puryear A. A comparison of early clinical and radiographic complications of iliac screw fixation versus S2 alar iliac (S2AI) fixation in the adult and pediatric populations[J]. J Spinal Disord Tech, 2015,28(4):E199-E205.
[7] Kwan M K, Jeffry A, Chan C Y, et al. A radiological evaluation of the morphometry and safety of S1, S2 and S2-ilium screws in the Asian population using three dimensional computed tomography scan:an analysis of 180 pelvis[J]. Surg Radiol Anat, 2012,34(3):217-227.
[8] Matsukawa K, Yato Y, Kato T, et al. Cortical bone trajectory for lumbosacral fixation: penetrating S-1 endplate screw technique: technical note[J]. J Neurosurg Spine, 2014,21(2):203-209.
[9] Kubaszewski L, Nowakowski A, Kaczmarczyk J. Evidence-based support for S1 transpedicular screw entry point modification[J]. J Orthop Surg Res, 2014,9:22.
[10] Kostuik J P, Errico T J, Gleason T F. Techniques of internal fixation for degenerative conditions of the lumbar spine[J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 1986(203):219-231.
[11] Han D P, Wang J Y. Comparison of different insertion techniques for lumbosacral fixation improvement: a finite element study[J]. Orthop Surg, 2020,12(1):262-268.
[12] Berry C A, Thawrani D P, Makhoul F R. Inclusion of L5-S1 in oblique lumbar interbody fusion-techniques and early complications-a single center experience[J]. Spine J, 2021,21(3):418-429.
[13] Tsuchiya K, Bridwell K H, Kuklo T R, et al. Minimum 5-year analysis of L5-S1 fusion using sacropelvic fixation (bilateral S1 and iliac screws) for spinal deformity[J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2006,31(3):303-308.
[14] El D M, Raad M, Okafor L, et al. Sacropelvic fixation: a comprehensive review[J]. Spine Deform, 2019,7(4):509-516.
[15] Mirkovic S, Abitbol J J, Steinman J, et al. Anatomic consideration for sacral screw placement[J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 1991,16(Suppl 6):S289-S294.
[16] Luk K D, Chen L, Lu W W. A stronger bicortical sacral pedicle screw fixation through the s1 endplate: an in vitro cyclic loading and pull-out force evaluation[J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2005,30(5):525-529.
[17] Zhu Q, Lu W W, Holmes A D, et al. The effects of cyclic loading on pull-out strength of sacral screw fixation: an in vitro biomechanical study[J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2000,25(9):1065-1069.
[18] Inceoglu S, Ferrara L, McLain R F. Pedicle screw fixation strength: pullout versus insertional torque[J]. Spine J, 2004,4(5):513-518.
[19] Zdeblick T A, Kunz D N, Cooke M E, et al. Pedicle screw pullout strength. Correlation with insertional torque[J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 1993,18(12):1673-1676.
[20] Liu C W, Wang L L, Xu Y K, et al. Traditional and cortical trajectory screws of static and dynamic lumbar fixation- a finite element study[J]. BMC Musculoskelet Disord, 2020,21(1):463.
[21] Matsukawa K, Yato Y, Imabayashi H, et al. Biomechanical evaluation of the fixation strength of lumbar pedicle screws using cortical bone trajectory: a finite element study[J]. J Neurosurg Spine, 2015,23(4):471-478.
[22] Matsukawa K, Yato Y, Kato T, et al. In vivo analysis of insertional torque during pedicle screwing using cortical bone trajectory technique[J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2014,39(4):E240-E245.
[23] Krag M H, Beynnon B D, Pope M H, et al. Depth of insertion of transpedicular vertebral screws into human vertebrae: effect upon screw-vertebra interface strength[J]. J Spinal Disord, 1988,1(4):287-294.
[24] Cho W, Cho S K, Wu C. The biomechanics of pedicle screw-based instrumentation[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Br, 2010,92(8):1061-1065.
[25] Kim K J, Kim D H, Lee J I, et al. Hounsfield units on lumbar computed tomography for predicting regional bone mineral density[J]. Open Med (Wars), 2019,14:545-551.
[26] Schreiber J J, Anderson P A, Rosas H G, et al. Hounsfield units for assessing bone mineral density and strength: a tool for osteoporosis management[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2011,93(11):1057-1063.
[27] Schreiber J J, Anderson P A, Hsu W K. Use of computed tomography for assessing bone mineral density[J]. Neurosurg Focus, 2014,37(1):E4.
[28] Zaidi Q, Danisa O A, Cheng W. Measurement techniques and utility of hounsfield unit values for assessment of bone quality prior to spinal Instrumentation: a review of current literature[J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2019,44(4):E239-E244.
[29] Zhang R J, Li H M, Gao H, et al. Associations between the hounsfield unit values of different trajectories and bone mineral density of vertebrae: cortical bone and traditional trajectories[J]. Am J Transl Res, 2020,12(7):3906-3916.
[30] Zhang R, Gao H, Li H, et al. Differences in bone mineral density of trajectory between lumbar cortical and traditional pedicle screws[J]. J Orthop Surg Res, 2019,14(1):128.
[31] Mayer M, Stephan D, Resch H, et al. Biomechanical comparison of sacral fixation characteristics of standard s1-pedicle screw fixation versus a novel constrained S1-dual-screw anchorage in the S1-pedicle and S1-alar bone[J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2015,40(24):1890-1897.