Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Objective: To propose a screw algorithm and investigate the anatomical feasibilities and clinical outcomes of five distinct fixation methods for C2-3 fused vertebra with high-ridding vertebral arteries (VA) (HRVA) when the C2 pedicle screw placement is unfeasible.
Methods: Thirty surgical patients with congenital C2-3 fusion, HRVA, and atlantoaxial dislocation (AAD) were included. We designed a algorithm for alternative screw implantation into C2-3 fused vertebrae, including C2 pedicle screw with in-out-in (passing VA groove) technique (in-out-in screw), subfacetal screw, translaminar screw, lateral mass screw, C3 pedicle screw. VA diameter and position, C2 and C3 pedicles, superior facets, fused lamina, and fused lateral mass dimensions were evaluated for screw implantation indication. Implant failure, reduction loss, implant placement accuracy were investigated by computed tomography.
Results: A total of 5 VAs were identified as distant VAs; a total of 2 VAs were categorized as occlusive VAs. Sufficient dimension of lateral mass and lamina provided the broadest indications for screw implantation, while the distant or occlusive VA provided the most limited indications for in-out-in screw. The indications of five alternative methods ranged from narrowest to widest as follows: in-out-in screw, C3 pedicle screw, subfacetal screw, translaminar screw, lateral mass screw. The translaminar screws and the lateral mass screws increased the probability of implant failure. All patients who received in-out-in screws, C3 pedicle screws, and subfacetal screws achieved fusion. The accuracy ranged from lowest to highest as follows: C3 pedicle screw, lateral mass screw, in-out-in screw, subfacetal screw, translaminar screw. No translaminar screws deviated.
Conclusions: The algorithm proved to be a valuable tool for screw selection in cases of C2-3 fused vertebrae with HRVAs. The subfacetal screw, boasting broad indications, a high fusion rate, and exceptional accuracy, stood as the primary preferred alternative.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10143-024-02719-z | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!