Paravertebral foramen screw fixation for posterior cervical spine surgery: clinical case series

View More View Less
  • 1 Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan
Restricted access

Purchase Now

USD  $45.00

Spine - 1 year subscription bundle (Individuals Only)

USD  $376.00

JNS + Pediatrics + Spine - 1 year subscription bundle (Individuals Only)

USD  $612.00
Print or Print + Online

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this study was to clarify the clinical utility of paravertebral foramen screws (PVFSs) and to determine intraoperative indicators for appropriate screw placement during posterior cervical fusion surgery to improve its safety.

METHODS

The authors included data from 46 patients (29 men and 17 women, mean age 61.7 years) who underwent posterior cervical spine surgery with 94 PVFSs. Of the 94 PVFSs, 77 were used in C6, 9 in C3, 5 in C4, and 3 in C5. According to the cervical lateral radiographic view, the authors divided the 94 PVFSs into 3 groups as follows: a longer group, in which the tip of PVFS was located anteriorly from the line of the posterior wall of the vertebral body (> +0 mm); an intermediate group, in which the screw tip was located up to 2 mm posteriorly to the posterior wall of the vertebral body (–2 to 0 mm); and a shorter group, in which the screw tip was located more than 2 mm posteriorly (< –2 mm). The accuracy of screw placement was assessed using CT imaging in the axial plane, and the proportion of screws penetrating a vertebral foramen or a transverse foramen was compared between the 3 groups. Screw loosening was defined as a lucent zone around the screw evaluated on cervical radiography at 1 year after surgery. Complications related to PVFS insertion and revision surgery related to PVFS were evaluated.

RESULTS

The authors classified 25 PVFSs into the longer group, 43 into the intermediate group, and 26 into the shorter group. The proportion of screws penetrating a vertebral foramen was largest in the shorter group, and the proportion penetrating a transverse foramen was largest in the longer group. Screw loosening was confirmed for 3 of 94 PVFSs. One PVFS inserted in C6 unilaterally within a long construct from C2 to C7 showed loosening, but it did not cause clinical symptoms. Revision surgery was required for 2 PVFSs inserted in C3 bilaterally as the lower instrumented vertebra in occiput–cervical fusion because they pulled out. There was no neurovascular complication related to PVFS insertion.

CONCLUSIONS

PVFSs are useful for posterior cervical fusion surgery as alternative anchor screws, and the line of the posterior wall of the cervical body on lateral fluoroscopic images is a potential intraoperative reference to indicate an appropriate trajectory for PVFSs.

ABBREVIATIONS

BMD = bone mineral density; CPS = cervical pedicle screw; LMS = lateral mass screw; OPLL = ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament; PVFS = paravertebral foramen screw; VA = vertebral artery.

Spine - 1 year subscription bundle (Individuals Only)

USD  $376.00

JNS + Pediatrics + Spine - 1 year subscription bundle (Individuals Only)

USD  $612.00
  • 1

    Abumi K, Itoh H, Taneichi H, Kaneda K. Transpedicular screw fixation for traumatic lesions of the middle and lower cervical spine: description of the techniques and preliminary report. J Spinal Disord. 1994;7(1):1928.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2

    Wright NM, Lauryssen C. Vertebral artery injury in C1–2 transarticular screw fixation: results of a survey of the AANS/CNS section on disorders of the spine and peripheral nerves. J Neurosurg. 1998;88(4):634640.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3

    Johnston TL, Karaikovic EE, Lautenschlager EP, Marcu D. Cervical pedicle screws vs. lateral mass screws: uniplanar fatigue analysis and residual pullout strengths. Spine J. 2006;6(6):667672.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4

    Yoshihara H, Passias PG, Errico TJ. Screw-related complications in the subaxial cervical spine with the use of lateral mass versus cervical pedicle screws: a systematic review. J Neurosurg Spine. 2013;19(5):614623.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5

    Aramomi M, Ishikawa T, Maki S. Paravertebral foramen screw fixation for posterior cervical spine surgery. Conference abstract. Article in Japanese. J Spine Res. 2014;5:549.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6

    Maki S, Aramomi M, Matsuura Y, Furuya T, Ota M, Iijima Y, et al. Paravertebral foramen screw fixation for posterior cervical spine fusion: biomechanical study and description of a novel technique. J Neurosurg Spine. 2017;27(4):415420.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7

    Kim MK, Cho HJ, Kwak DS. A new anatomical approach of cervical lateral mass for cervical pedicle screw and paravertebral foramen screw insertion. PLoS One. 2019;14(7):e0219119.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8

    Chen X, Yang Q, Kalisi KUMM, Yuan S, Tian Y, Liu X. Comparison of morphometric measurements of traditional posterior cervical screw and paravertebral foramen screw in Chinese population. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2021;46(7):E443E449.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9

    Nagashima K, Koda M, Abe T, Kumagai H, Miura K, Fujii K, et al. Implant failure of pedicle screws in long-segment posterior cervical fusion is likely to occur at C7 and is avoidable by concomitant C6 or T1 buttress pedicle screws. J Clin Neurosci. 2019;63:106109.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10

    Mohamed E, Ihab Z, Moaz A, Ayman N, Haitham AE. Lateral mass fixation in subaxial cervical spine: anatomic review. Global Spine J. 2012;2(1):3946.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11

    Anderst WJ, Thorhauer ED, Lee JY, Donaldson WF, Kang JD. Cervical spine bone mineral density as a function of vertebral level and anatomic location. Spine J. 2011;11(7):659667.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12

    Hostin RA, Wu C, Perra JH, Polly DW, Akesen B, Wroblewski JM. A biomechanical evaluation of three revision screw strategies for failed lateral mass fixation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2008;33(22):24152421.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13

    Coe JD, Vaccaro AR, Dailey AT, Skolasky RL Jr, Sasso RC, Ludwig SC, et al. Lateral mass screw fixation in the cervical spine: a systematic literature review. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013;95(23):21362143.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 143 143 118
Full Text Views 29 29 12
PDF Downloads 52 52 21
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0