Using Reformatted Axial Computed Tomography Images in Isolation Will Miss Narrow S1 Transsacral Screw Corridors.
Journal
Journal of orthopaedic trauma
ISSN: 1531-2291
Titre abrégé: J Orthop Trauma
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8807705
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 06 2022
01 06 2022
Historique:
accepted:
11
10
2021
pubmed:
16
10
2021
medline:
18
6
2022
entrez:
15
10
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To evaluate S1 transsacral (TS) corridors on reformatted and nonreformatted computed tomography (CT) images to determine which most reliably identifies narrow corridors. Retrospective cohort. Level 1 trauma center. Two hundred forty-five patients with operative pelvic ring injuries. CT scan review. Preoperative CT scans were evaluated to determine the width of the S1 TS corridor on standard axial nonreformatted (ANR), axial reformatted (AR), and coronal reformatted images. Sensitivity and specificity of each format to detect a narrow corridor (<10 mm on AR or coronal reformatted) were calculated. Patients with S1 TS screws were evaluated to determine the rate of screw breach with narrow corridors. The axial width of the S1 TS corridor was consistently smaller on ANR versus AR images (mean difference 1.4mm, 95% confidence interval 1.1-1.5). The corridor width on ANR images was on average 86% of the AR measurement. ANR images had the highest sensitivity and specificity (100% and 98%) for detecting S1 TS corridors <10 mm. Fifty-three S1 TS screws were placed in corridors ranging 10-23 mm on AR images and 7-19 mm on ANR images. Four (57%) of the 7 screws placed in corridors less than 10 mm in width on ANR images breached the sacral cortex. Using ANR images to measure the S1 TS corridor consistently measured smaller widths than AR images and identified all narrow corridors. A high rate of screw breach was noted with screw placement in narrow corridors. Diagnostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34653102
doi: 10.1097/BOT.0000000000002295
pii: 00005131-202206000-00004
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
292-296Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors report no conflict of interest.
Références
Halawi MJ. Pelvic ring injuries: surgical management and long-term outcomes. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2016;7:1–6.
Zwingmann J, Hauschild O, Bode G, et al. Malposition and revision rates of different imaging modalities for percutaneous iliosacral screw fixation following pelvic fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2013;133:1257–1265.
Kaiser SP, Gardner MJ, Liu J, et al. Anatomic determinants of sacral dysmorphism and implications for safe iliosacral screw placement. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2014;96:e120.
Miller AN, Routt MLC. Variations in sacral morphology and implications for iliosacral screw fixation. Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2012;20:8–16.
McAndrew CM, Merriman DJ, Gardner MJ, et al. Standardized posterior pelvic imaging. J Orthop Trauma. 2014;28:665–673.
Gardner MJ, Morshed S, Nork SE, et al. Quantification of the upper and second sacral segment safe zones in normal and dysmorphic sacra. J Orthop Trauma. 2010;24:622–629.
LE B, ME H. Preoperative planning for percutaneous transsacral, transiliac screws. J Orthop Trauma. 2018;32(suppl 1):S22–S23.
Wagner D, Kamer L, Rommens PM, et al. 3D statistical modeling techniques to investigate the anatomy of the sacrum, its bone mass distribution, and the trans-sacral corridors. J Orthop Res. 2014;32:1543–1548.