A PHP Error was encountered

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

A screw algorithm for congenital C2-3 fusion with high-riding vertebral arteries: feasibilities and clinical outcomes of five different fixation techniques. | LitMetric

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-zDOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

screw
25
lateral mass
24
pedicle screw
20
screw translaminar
20
in-out-in screw
16
subfacetal screw
16
c2-3 fused
12
screw implantation
12
screw subfacetal
12
translaminar screw
12

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!