Background. The overall incidence of neurological symptoms attributed to lumbar misplaced screws has been described to occur in 3.48% of patients undergoing surgery. These lumbar radicular neurological lesions are undetected with conventional intraoperative neurophysiological and radiological controls. The hypothesis of this study was that direct stimulation of the pedicle screw after placement in the lumbar spine may not work as well as for screws placed in the thoracic pedicles. A more suitable method for the lumbar spine could be the stimulation of the pedicle track with a ball-tipped probe. Methods. Comparative observational study on the detection of malpostioned lumbar pedicle screws using two different techniques in two different periods: t-EMG screw stimulation (2011–2012) and track stimulation (2013–2014). A total of 1440 lumbar pedicle screws were placed in 242 patients undergoing surgery for vertebral deformities in the last four years (2011–2014). In the first two years, 802 lumbar screws were neuromonitored using t-EMG during. In the last two years, 638 screws were placed after probe stimulation of the pedicle track. Standardised t-EMG conventional registration and fluoroscopy were afterwards performed in all cases. Results. Six patients (4.4%) in the t-EMG group without signs of screw misplacement developed radicular pain. After checking with CT scan, a caudal prominence of the screw at the inferior aspect of the pedicle was detected in 7 screws (0.9%) and they were removed. After removal, probe stimulation was performed at the middle track showing abnormal thresholds (3.9–9.7mA). In the second group (track stimulation), 11 cases (10.8%) had thresholds below 7 mA. In these cases, the intrapedicular route was changed. None of these 106 patients presented postoperative radiculopathy and CT scans showed that all screws were well positioned. Conclusions. The t-EMG stimulation of lumbar pedicle screws offer some false negatives cases. However, the record in the middle pedicle track is able to detect misplaced screws and prevent the development of lumbar radiculopathy. Therefore, systematic pedicle track stimulation is strongly recommended in the lumbar spine. Level of Evidence. Level III

In patients with osteoporosis there is always a strong possibility that pedicle screws will loosen. This makes it difficult to select the appropriate osteoporotic patient for a spinal fusion. The purpose of this study was to determine the correlation between bone mineral density (BMD) and the magnitude of torque required to insert a pedicle screw. To accomplish this, 181 patients with degenerative disease of the lumbar spine were studied prospectively. Each underwent dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) and intra-operative measurement of the torque required to insert each pedicle screw. The levels of torque generated in patients with osteoporosis and osteopenia were significantly lower than those achieved in normal patients. Positive correlations were observed between BMD and T-value at the instrumented lumbar vertebrae, mean BMD and mean T-value of the lumbar vertebrae, and mean BMD and mean T-value of the proximal femur. The predictive torque (Nm) generated during pedicle screw insertion was [-0.127 + 1.62 × (BMD at the corresponding lumbar vertebrae)], as measured by linear regression analysis. The positive correlation between BMD and the maximum torque required to insert a pedicle screw suggests that pre-operative assessment of BMD may be useful in determining the ultimate strength of fixation of a device, as well as the number of levels that need to be fixed with pedicle screws in patients who are suspected of having osteoporosis

Introduction. We prospectively examined the effect of pedicle screw placement at a young age (<5 years) for early-onset spinal deformity on the growth and development of pedicles and the spinal canal. Methods. Patients with early-onset deformity who received pedicle screw placement before the age of 5 years and had preoperative and final follow-up axial imaging were included. To increase sample size, patients who had the same criteria but with no preoperative axial images were also included. Anteroposterior and transverse diameters of the canal and pedicle length were measured on axial images cutting through the middle of the pedicle (figures 1 and 2). Results. 13 patients (five male, eight female) met inclusion criteria. Average age at surgery was 46·6 months (29–60), and average follow-up 49·8 months (24–82). 77 instrumented and 32 non-instrumented levels were studied. The table summarises measurements. In the nine patients without preoperative axial imaging, pedicle lengths and canal diameters seemed to accord with previously published normative morphological data for this age group. Conclusions. Animal studies have shown the potential slowing of pedicle and canal growth in immature spines with pedicle screws. This is the first study to examine the behaviour of instrumented immature human vertebrae prospectively. Early application of pedicle screws does not seem to cause adverse effects on pedicle and canal growth in young patients. This discordance between human and animal studies may have three explanations: (1) although the neurocentral cartilage is still visible it may not be physiologically active in this age group; (2) a single screw across may not exert sufficient compression; (3) or the canal may have means of remodelling that is yet not known

Study design. Prospective clinical and radiological analysis of children with complex cervical deformities for the safety of cervical pedicle screw insertion. Objectives. To analyse the possibility, safety and efficacy of cervical pedicle screw insertion in complex pediatric cervical deformities, where conventional stabilisation techniques would not have provided rigid fixation. Summary of Background Data. Although the usage of cervical pedicle screws (CPS) in adults has become established, the feasibility and safety of its application in children has not been described previously in the literature. Methods. Sixteen children of mean age 9.7 ± 2.6 years (range: 3 - 13) requiring spinal stabilization for cranio-vertebral junction anomalies (n=10), cervico-thoracic kyphosis/ kyphoscoliosis (n=5) and cervical tumor excision (n=1) formed the study group. Feasibility of CPS insertion was assessed by computerised tomography images. Standard 3.0 mm titanium pedicle screws were inserted using intraoperative Iso-C C arm based 3 D computer navigation and the containment was post operatively evaluated with CT scan. Results. Based on preoperative CT imaging, 55 pedicles were selected for screw fixation. Intra operatively CPS was successfully inserted at 51 levels and at four sclerosed pedicles (7.3%), screws could not be inserted. At 42 levels, the screws were inserted in the classical description of pedicle screw application and in nine deformed vertebra, the screws were inserted in a non-classical fashion, taking purchase in the three columns of the cervical vertebra. Forty five (88.3%) screws were fully contained, six (11.7 %) had a non-critical breach and none had a critical breach. No perioperative complications related to pedicle screw insertion were noted. Conclusion. Safe insertion of cervical pedicle screws is possible in children. Iso-C navigation provides real time virtual imaging and improves the safety and accuracy of successful pedicle fixation even in altered vertebral anatomy. Pedicle width morphometrics do not restrict screw insertion

Aims. Anchorage of pedicle screw rod instrumentation in the elderly spine with poor bone quality remains challenging. Our study aims to evaluate how the screw bone anchorage is affected by screw design, bone quality, loading conditions, and cementing techniques. Methods. Micro-finite element (µFE) models were created from micro-CT (μCT) scans of vertebrae implanted with two types of pedicle screws (L: Ennovate and R: S. 4. ). Simulations were conducted for a 10 mm radius region of interest (ROI) around each screw and for a full vertebra (FV) where different cementing scenarios were simulated around the screw tips. Stiffness was calculated in pull-out and anterior bending loads. Results. Experimental pull-out strengths were excellently correlated to the µFE pull-out stiffness of the ROI (R. 2. > 0.87) and FV (R. 2. > 0.84) models. No significant difference due to screw design was observed. Cement augmentation increased pull-out stiffness by up to 94% and 48% for L and R screws, respectively, but only increased bending stiffness by up to 6.9% and 1.5%, respectively. Cementing involving only one screw tip resulted in lower stiffness increases in all tested screw designs and loading cases. The stiffening effect of cement augmentation on pull-out and bending stiffness was strongly and negatively correlated to local bone density around the screw (correlation coefficient (R) = -0.95). Conclusion. This combined experimental, µCT and µFE study showed that regional analyses may be sufficient to predict fixation strength in pull-out and that full analyses could show that cement augmentation around pedicle screws increased fixation stiffness in both pull-out and bending, especially for low-density bone. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2021;10(12):797–806

Aims. The aim of this study was to systematically compare the safety and accuracy of robot-assisted (RA) technique with conventional freehand with/without fluoroscopy-assisted (CT) pedicle screw insertion for spine disease. Methods. A systematic search was performed on PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and WANFANG for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated the safety and accuracy of RA compared with conventional freehand with/without fluoroscopy-assisted pedicle screw insertion for spine disease from 2012 to 2019. This meta-analysis used Mantel-Haenszel or inverse variance method with mixed-effects model for heterogeneity, calculating the odds ratio (OR), mean difference (MD), standardized mean difference (SMD), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The results of heterogeneity, subgroup analysis, and risk of bias were analyzed. Results. Ten RCTs with 713 patients and 3,331 pedicle screws were included. Compared with CT, the accuracy rate of RA was superior in Grade A with statistical significance and Grade A + B without statistical significance. Compared with CT, the operating time of RA was longer. The difference between RA and CT was statistically significant in radiation dose. Proximal facet joint violation occurred less in RA than in CT. The postoperative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) of RA was smaller than that of CT, and there were some interesting outcomes in our subgroup analysis. Conclusion. RA technique could be viewed as an accurate and safe pedicle screw implantation method compared to CT. A robotic system equipped with optical intraoperative navigation is superior to CT in accuracy. RA pedicle screw insertion can improve accuracy and maintain stability for some challenging areas. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2020;9(10):653–666

Introduction. To introduce a new classification method and analyze related risk factor about lateral wall perforation associated with lower cervical pedicle screw and free-hand insertion technique. Methods. A Retrospective study was made to analyze 214 patients (1024 screws) with various cervical spine disorders, involved in pedicle screw instrumentation at C3-7 from July 2004 to July 2009. Researchers assessed the position of the screws in the pedicle by carefully probing intraoperatively and studying postoperative thin-slice computed tomography scan. Perforation of lateral wall was classified into two phases. Phase I refers to the burst of the pedicle by screw, which means that the length of screw threads penetrating the external cortex of pedicles on CT scan is 2 mm, whereas in Phase, the length is >2 mm. The Penetrated screws and related factors were analyzed though Backward Stepwise (Wald) Logistic regression. Results. During the follow-up, 2 screws were reported to be broken and 1 screw loosened. Of the screws inserted, total of 129 screws 12.60% have shown violated of lateral pedicle walls, included 101 screws (9.86%) causative of Phase I and 28 screws (2.73%) of Phase II. Two variance were deduced in the regression analysis, which concerned to ratio variance between inner and lateral walls, PRC 0.695, OR value = 2.003and angle difference variance between screws implanted and measurements preoperativePRC −1.542, OR value = 0.214). Conclusions. Free-hand lower cervical pedicle screw insertion in this series was comparatively safety. Phase I Penetration was believed to be safe of vertebral artery and Phase II faced to higher risk of artery damage. The main risk factor of lateral wall perforation was the ratio variance between inner and lateral wall, while the main protection factor was the angle difference variance between screws implanted and CT measurements

Introduction: Pedicle screws are now commonly used to instrument the thoracic spine and offers improved three point fixation and therefore theoretically offers better derotation of the spine during corrective manoeuvres in scoliosis surgery. Aim: To compare thoracic scoliosis correction using either pedicle hooks or pedicle screws. Methods: Two patient groups were studied. Data was collected prospectively and this is a review of the radiological data. All patients had structural thoracic scoliosis. Group 1, 14 patients (9 female and 5 male) mean age 14.6, were treated with posterior correction of scoliosis using the standard USS II technique using pedicle hooks and screws. Group 2, 14 patients (11 female and 3 male) mean age 15.3 were treated using pedicle screws alone to correct the apical deformity, using a variation of the original USS technique. Pre and postoperative Cobb angle, apical vertebral rotation (AVR, Perdriolle method) and apical vertebral translation (AVT) were measured. Unpaired “t” test was used to compare the magnitude of correction in both groups. The mean follow up period was 30 months (range: 27–42). Results: The mean corrections of Cobb angle, AVR and AVT, in group I were 61.1% (range: 48.5–83.9), 33.3% (range: 8.6–100) and 62.9% (range: 43.2–91.4), respectively. In Group 2 the corrections were: 57.4% (range: 21.4–81.7), 57.2% (range:16.7–100) and 58.7% (range: 34–80.9). There were no statistically significant differences between the correction of Cobb angle or AVT in both groups (P=0.479 and 0.443 respectively). However, the pedicle screws proved to be more effective at correcting the AVR (P= 0.017). No complications occurred and correction has been well maintained with a minimum of 2 year follow-up. Conclusion: Pedicle screws can safely and effectively replace the pedicle hooks in the classical USS technique. They are more effective at correcting the rotational deformity, although do not provide a better correction of Cobb angle. These technical results now need to be correlated with relevant clinical outcomes

Aim: To compare thoracic scoliosis correction using either pedicle hooks or pedicle screws. Methods and results: Two patient groups were studied. Data was collected prospectively and this is a review of the radiological data. All patients had structural thoracic scoliosis. Group 1, 14 patients (9 female and 5 male) mean age 14.6, were treated with posterior correction of scoliosis using the standard USS II technique using pedicle hooks and screws. Group 2, 14 patients (11 female and 3 male) mean age 15.3 were treated using pedicle screws alone to correct the apical deformity, using a variation of the original USS technique. Pre and postoperative Cobb angle, apical vertebral rotation (AVR, Perdriolle method) and apical vertebral translation (AVT) were measured. Unpaired “t” test was used to compare the magnitude of correction in both groups. The mean follow up period was 6.7 months (range:3–18). The mean corrections of Cobb angle, AVR and AVT, in group I were 61.1% (range:48.5–83.9), 33.3% (range:8.6–100) and 62.9% (range:43.2–91.4), respectively. In Group 2 the corrections were: 57.4% (range:21.4–81.7), 57.2% (range:16.7–100) and 58.7% (range:34–80.9). There is no statistically significant difference between the correction of Cobb angle or AVT in both groups (P=0.479 and 0.443 respectively). However, the pedicle screws proved to be more effective at correcting the AVR (P= 0.017). No complications occurred and correction has been well maintained. Conclusion: Pedicle screws can safely and effectively replace the pedicle hooks in the classical USS technique. They are more effective at correcting the rotational deformity, although do not provide a better correction of Cobb angle. These technical results now need to be correlated with relevant clinical outcomes

INTRODUCTION. The correct placement of pedicle screws is a major part of spine fusion and it requires experienced trained spinal surgeons. In the era of European Working Time Directive (EWTD), surgical trainees have less opportunity to acquire skills. Josh Kauffman (Author of The First 20 Hours) examined the K. Anders-Ericsson study that 10,000 hours is required to be an expert. He suggests you can be good at anything in 20 hours following 5 methods. This study was done to show the use of accelerated learning in trainees to achieve competency and confidence on the insertion of pedicle screws. METHODS. Data was collected using 3 experienced spine surgeons, 8 trainees and 1 novice (control) on the cadaveric insertion of pedicle screws over a 4 day didactic lecture in the cadaver lab. Each candidate had 2 cadavers and 156 screw placements over 4 hour shifts. Data was collected for time of pedicle screw insertion for each level on the left and right side. A pre-course and post-course questionnaire (Likert scale) was conducted. RESULTS. There were 8 candidates (surgeons) involved. 1 spinal SpR, 6 spine fellows and 1 junior consultant. A physiotherapist was the control novice. The surgeons and the control got significantly faster over time. The control made significantly more errors than the surgeons. Surgeons were significantly faster by the end (p value < 0.05). The control got faster over time and by the end, was no longer significantly slower than the surgeon when they first started. CONCLUSION. Pedicle screw insertion can cause significant morbidity, which includes paralysis. As a trainee, this is not an easy skill to acquire or practice. This focused pedicle screw course shows that a junior spinal surgeon can achieve improved competency and confidence in 20 hours but furthermore a complete novice can learn to insert pedicle screws and reach a level of competence almost at the level of the trainee in 20 hours as well

Aims. The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the correction achieved using a convex pedicle screw technique and a low implant density achieved using periapical concave-sided screws and a high implant density. We hypothesized that there would be no difference in outcome between the two techniques. Methods. We retrospectively analyzed a series of 51 patients with a thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. There were 26 patients in the convex pedicle screw group who had screws implanted periapically (Group 2) and a control group of 25 patients with bilateral pedicle screws (Group 1). The patients’ charts were reviewed and pre- and postoperative radiographs evaluated. Postoperative patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were recorded. Results. The number of implants (14.5 vs 17.1) and the implant density (1.5 vs 1.9) were significantly lower in Group 2 (p < 0.001). Operating time was 27 minutes shorter in Group 2 than in Group 1, with a mean of 217 minutes (SD 50.5; 120 to 346). The duration of surgery per instrumented vertebra was reduced by 19% in Group 2 (p = 0.011). No statistical difference was found in the postoperative Cobb angle, vertebral rotation, the relative correction achieved, or postoperative PROMs. Conclusion. Despite a lower implant density and achieving correction through a convex rod, surgical correction of the Cobb angle and vertebral body rotation was similar in both groups. Periapical pedicle screws and primary correction on the concave side do not seem to be mandatory in order to achieve good surgical results in idiopathic thoracic scoliosis. The operating time was shorter in the group with lower implant density. In conclusion, the technique provided good results and has the potential to reduce complications and costs. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(3):536–541

Introduction. Pedicle screw loosening in posterior instrumentation of thoracolumbar spine occurs up to 60% in osteoporotic patients. These complications may be alleviated using more flexible implant materials and novel designs that could be optimized with reliable computational modeling. This study aimed to develop and validate non-linear homogenized finite element (hFE) simulations to predict pedicle screw toggling. Method. Ten cadaveric vertebral bodies (L1-L5) from two female and three male elderly donors were scanned with high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography (HR-pQCT, Scanco Medical) and instrumented with pedicle screws made of carbon fiber-reinforced polyether-etherketone (CF/PEEK). Sample-specific 3D-printed guides ensured standardized instrumentation, embedding, and loading procedures. The samples were biomechanically tested to failure in a toggling setup using an electrodynamic testing machine (Acumen, MTS) applying a quasi-static cyclic testing protocol of three ramps with exponentially increasing peak (1, 2 and 4 mm) and constant valley displacements. Implant-bone kinematics were assessed with a stereographic 3D motion tracking camera system (Aramis SRX, GOM). hFE models with non-linear, homogenized bone material properties including a strain-based damage criterion were developed based on intact HR-pQCT and instrumented 3D C-arm scans. The experimental loading conditions were imposed, the maximum load per cycle was calculated and compared to the experimental results. HR-pQCT-based bone volume fraction (BV/TV) around the screws was correlated with the experimental peak forces at each displacement level. Result. The nonlinear hFE models accurately (slope = 1.07, intercept = 0.2 N) and precisely (R. 2. = 0.84) predicted the experimental peak forces at each displacement level. BV/TV alone was a weak predictor (R. 2. <0.31). Conclusion. The hFE models enable fast design iterations aiming to reduce the risk of screw loosening in low-density vertebrae. Improved flexible implant designs are expected to contribute to reduced complication rates in osteoporotic patients

Aims. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether, after correction of an adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS), leaving out the subfascial drain gives results that are no worse than using a drain in terms of total blood loss, drop in haemoglobin level, and opioid consumption. Methods. Adolescents (aged between 10 and 21 years) with an idiopathic scoliosis (major curve ≥ 45°) were eligible for inclusion in this randomized controlled noninferiority trial (n = 125). A total of 90 adolescents who had undergone segmental pedicle screw instrumentation were randomized into no-drain or drain groups at the time of wound closure using the sealed envelope technique (1:1). The primary outcome was a drop in the haemoglobin level during first three postoperative days. Secondary outcomes were 48-hour postoperative oxycodone consumption and surgical complications. Results. All 90 patients were included in the primary outcome analysis (no drain = 43; drain = 47). The mean total postoperative blood loss (intraoperative and drain output) was significantly higher in the group with a subfascial drain than in the no-drain group (1,008 ml (SD 520) vs 631 ml (SD 518); p < 0.001). The drop in haemoglobin level did not differ between the study groups over the postoperative timepoints (p = 0.290). The 48-hour opioid consumption was significantly higher in the no-drain group (2.0 mg/kg (SD 0.9) vs 1.4 (SD 0.6); p = 0.005). Two patients in the no-drain and one patient in the drain group developed a surgical site infection. Conclusion. Leaving the subfascial drain out after pedicle screw instrumentation for AIS is not associated with higher postoperative haemoglobin levels. Patients treated without a subfascial drain needed 30% more opioids during the first 48 hours than those who had a drain. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(9):1067–1072

Objectives. This presentation discusses the experience at our Centre with treating traumatic thoracolumbar fractures using percutaneous pedicle screw fixation and also looks at clinical and radiological outcomes as well as complications. Design. This is a retrospective study reviewing all cases performed between Jan 2013 and June 2019. Subjects. In our study there were 257 patients in total, of which there were 123 males and 134 females aged between 17 and 70. Methods. We reviewed the case notes and imaging retrospectively to obtain the relevant data. Results. A total of 257 patients were included, 123 males and 134 females; the mean age was 47.6 years. The majority of injuries were from fall from significant height. In 98 cases the fracture involved a thoracic vertebra and in 159 cases a lumbar vertebra. Percutaneous pedicle screw fixation was performed either one level above and below fracture or Two levels above and below the fracture depending upon the level of injury. Forty two cases were treated with additional short pedicle screws at the level of fracture. More than 15% (39) of patients presented with a neurological deficit on admission and more than 80% (32) of those showed post-operative improvement in their neurology as per Frankel Grading system. The mean Operative time was 117minutes +− 45, and mean length of hospital stay was 7.2 +− 3.8 days, with significant improvement in Visual analogue score. Percutaneous fixation achieved a satisfactory improvement in radiological parameters including sagittal Cobb angle (SCA) post-operatively in all patients. The vast majority of patients achieved a good functional outcome according to modified Macnab criteria. Follow up was for a maximum of two years, with relevant imaging at each stage. Ten (3.8%) patients had wound infection with three patients requiring wound debridement. Four patients had upper level screws pulled out and in Four cases one screw was misplaced. All eight had revision surgery. Conclusions. Percutaneous pedicle screw fixation is a safe surgical option with comparable outcomes to open surgery and a potential reduction in perioperative morbidity. Percutaneous pedicle screw fixation is the primary surgical technique to treat traumatic thoracolumbar fractures at our Centre. There were no major complications in our series, with good functional outcome following surgery

Fracture of a pedicle is a rare complication of spinal instrumentation using pedicular screws, but it can lead to instability and pain and may necessitate extension of the fusion. Osteosynthesis of the fractured pedicle by cerclage-wire fixation and augmentation of the screw fixation by vertebroplasty or temporary elongation of the fixation, allows stabilisation without sacrifice of the adjacent healthy segment. We describe three patients who developed a fracture of the pedicle in the most caudal instrumented vertebra early after lumbar spinal fusion. During revision surgery the pedicles were reduced and secured by a soft cerclage wire bilaterally. Fusion was obtained at the site of the primary instrumentation and healing of the pedicles was achieved. Cerclage wiring of the fractured pedicle seems to be safe and avoids permanent extension of the fusion without the sacrifice of an otherwise healthy segment

There are three basic concepts that are important to the biomechanics of pedicle screw-based instrumentation. First, the outer diameter of the screw determines pullout strength, while the inner diameter determines fatigue strength. Secondly, when inserting a pedicle screw, the dorsal cortex of the spine should not be violated and the screws on each side should converge and be of good length. Thirdly, fixation can be augmented in cases of severe osteoporosis or revision. A trajectory parallel or caudal to the superior endplate can minimise breakage of the screw from repeated axial loading. Straight insertion of the pedicle screw in the mid-sagittal plane provides the strongest stability. Rotational stability can be improved by adding transverse connectors. The indications for their use include anterior column instability, and the correction of rotational deformity

Objectives. Cement augmentation of pedicle screws could be used to improve screw stability, especially in osteoporotic vertebrae. However, little is known concerning the influence of different screw types and amount of cement applied. Therefore, the aim of this biomechanical in vitro study was to evaluate the effect of cement augmentation on the screw pull-out force in osteoporotic vertebrae, comparing different pedicle screws (solid and fenestrated) and cement volumes (0 mL, 1 mL or 3 mL). Materials and Methods. A total of 54 osteoporotic human cadaver thoracic and lumbar vertebrae were instrumented with pedicle screws (uncemented, solid cemented or fenestrated cemented) and augmented with high-viscosity PMMA cement (0 mL, 1 mL or 3 mL). The insertion torque and bone mineral density were determined. Radiographs and CT scans were undertaken to evaluate cement distribution and cement leakage. Pull-out testing was performed with a material testing machine to measure failure load and stiffness. The paired t-test was used to compare the two screws within each vertebra. Results. Mean failure load was significantly greater for fenestrated cemented screws (+622 N; p ⩽ 0.001) and solid cemented screws (+460 N; p ⩽ 0.001) than for uncemented screws. There was no significant difference between the solid and fenestrated cemented screws (p = 0.5). In the lower thoracic vertebrae, 1 mL cement was enough to significantly increase failure load, while 3 mL led to further significant improvement in the upper thoracic, lower thoracic and lumbar regions. Conclusion. Conventional, solid pedicle screws augmented with high-viscosity cement provided comparable screw stability in pull-out testing to that of sophisticated and more expensive fenestrated screws. In terms of cement volume, we recommend the use of at least 1 mL in the thoracic and 3 mL in the lumbar spine. Cite this article: C. I. Leichtle, A. Lorenz, S. Rothstock, J. Happel, F. Walter, T. Shiozawa, U. G. Leichtle. Pull-out strength of cemented solid versus fenestrated pedicle screws in osteoporotic vertebrae. Bone Joint Res 2016;5:419–426

Introduction. Unplanned reoperations (UROs) following corrective surgery for adult spinal deformity (ASD) present significant challenges for both patients and surgeons. Understanding the specific UROs types is crucial for improving patient outcomes and refining surgical strategies in ASD correction. Method. This retrospective analysis utilized data from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database spanning from 2017 to 2021. Patient information was extracted using specific CPT codes related to posterior pedicle fixation. Result. In a cohort of 1088 patients undergoing posterior spinal deformity corrections, we examined various preoperative factors to discern their correlation with reoperation prevalence. Our analysis revealed no statistically significant differences in reoperation prevalence concerning gender (male: 4.0%, p=0.131) or ethnicity (Hispanic: 4.2%, p=0.192). Similarly, no notable associations were identified for diabetes mellitus, smoking status, dyspnea, history of severe COPD, hypertension, ASA classification, or functional health status before surgery, with reoperation prevalences ranging from 3.2% to 8.8% and p-values spanning from 0.146 to 0.744. Overall, the reoperation prevalence within the entire cohort stood at 5.2% (55 cases). In terms of the types of reoperations investigated, spinal-related procedures emerged as the most prevalent, accounting for 43.7% (24 cases), followed closely by wound site revisions at 23.6% (13 cases). Additionally, gastrointestinal-related procedures and various other miscellaneous interventions, such as uroscopy, demonstrated reoperation prevalences of 7.2% (4 cases) and 25.5% (14 cases), respectively. Conclusion. our findings highlight the diverse spectrum of reoperation procedures encountered following posterior spinal deformity corrections, with wound site revisions and spinal-related interventions being the most prevalent categories. These results emphasize the complexity of managing UROs in spinal surgery and the need for tailored approaches and infection/incision protocols to address the specific challenges associated with each type of reoperation

Aims. The aim of this study was to compare the peak pull-out force (PPF) of pedicle-lengthening screws (PLS) and traditional pedicle screws (TPS) using instant and cyclic fatigue testing. Materials and Methods. A total of 60 lumbar vertebrae were divided into six groups: PLS submitted to instant pull-out and fatigue-resistance testing (groups A1 and A2, respectively), TPS submitted to instant pull-out and fatigue-resistance testing (groups B1 and B2, respectively) and PLS augmented with 2 ml polymethylmethacrylate, submitted to instant pull-out and fatigue-resistance testing (groups C1 and C2, respectively). The PPF and normalized PPF (PPFn) for bone mineral density (BMD) were compared within and between all groups. Results. In all groups, BMD was significantly correlated with PPF (r = 0.83, p < 0.001). The PPFn in A1 was significantly less than in B1 (p = 0.006) and C1 (p = 0.002). The PPFn of A2 was significantly less than in B2 (p < 0.001) and C2 (p < 0.001). The PPFn in A1, B1, and C1 was significantly greater than in A2 (p = 0.002), B2 (p = 0.027), and C2 (p = 0.003). There were no significant differences in PPFn between B1 and C1, or between B2 and C2. Conclusion. Pedicle lengthening screws with cement augmentation can provide the same fixation stability as traditional pedicle screws and may be a viable clinical option. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:516–21