Search

Lateral mass screw (LMS) and cervical pedicle screw (CPS) fixation are among the most popular techniques for posterior fusion of the cervical spine. Early research prioritized the LMS approach as the trajectory resulted in fewer neurovascular complications; however, with the incorporation of navigation assistance, the CPS approach should be re-evaluated. Our objective was to report the findings of a meta-analysis focused on comparing the LMS and CPS techniques in terms of rate of various complications with inclusion of all levels from C2 to T1. We conducted a systematic review of PubMed and EMBASE databases with final inclusion criteria focused on identifying studies that reported outcomes and complications for either the CPS or LMS technique. These studies were then pooled, and statistical analyses were performed from the cumulative data. A total of 60 studies comprising 4165 participants and 16,669 screws placed within the C2-T1 levels were identified. Within these studies, the LMS group had a significantly increased odds for lateral mass fractures (odds ratio [OR] = 43.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.62-711.42), additional cervical surgeries (OR = 5.56, 95%CI = 2.95-10.48), and surgical site infections (SSI) (OR = 5.47, 95%CI = 1.65-18.16). No other significant differences between groups in terms of complications were identified. Within the subgroup analysis of navigation versus non-navigation-guided CPS placement, no significant differences were identified for individual complications, although collectively significantly fewer complications occurred with navigation (OR = 5.29, 95%CI = 2.03-13.78). The CPS group had significantly fewer lateral mass fractures, cervical revision surgeries, and SSIs. Furthermore, navigation-assisted CPS placement was associated with a significant reduction in complications overall., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Lateral mass screw (LMS) fixation for the treatment of subaxial cervical spine instability or deformity has been traditionally associated with few neurovascular complications. However, cervical pedicle screw (CPS) fixation has recently increased in popularity, especially with navigation assistance, because of the higher pullout strength of the pedicle screws. To their knowledge, the authors conducted the first meta-analysis comparing the complication rates during and/or after CPS and LMS placement for different pathologies causing cervical spine instability. A systematic literature search of PubMed and Embase from inception to January 12, 2021 was performed to identify studies reporting CPS and/or LMS-related complications. Complications were categorized into intraoperative and early postoperative (within 30 days of surgery) and late postoperative (after 30 days from surgery) complications. All studies that met the prespecified inclusion criteria were pooled and cumulatively analyzed. A total of 24 studies were conducted during the time frame of the search and comprising 1768 participants and 8636 subaxially placed screws met the inclusion criteria. The CPS group experienced significantly more postoperative C5 palsy (odds ratio [OR] = 3.48, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.27-9.53, p < 0.05). Otherwise, there were no significant differences between the LMS and CPS groups. There were no significant differences between the CPS and LMS groups in terms of neurovascular procedure-related complications other than significantly more C5 palsy in the CPS group., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

During lateral lumbar fusion, the trajectory of implant insertion approaches the great vessels anteriorly and the segmental arteries posteriorly, which carries the risk of vascular complications. We aimed to analyze vascular injuries for potential differences between oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) and lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) procedures at our institution. This was coupled with a systematic literature review of vascular complications associated with lateral lumbar fusions. A retrospective chart review was completed to identify consecutive patients who underwent lateral access fusions. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were used for the systematic review with the search terms "vascular injury" and "lateral lumbar surgery." Of 260 procedures performed at our institution, 211 (81.2%) patients underwent an LLIF and 49 (18.8%) underwent an OLIF. There were no major vascular complications in either group in this comparative study, but there were four (1.5%) minor vascular injuries (2 LLIF, 0.95%; 2 OLIF, 4.1%). Patients who experienced vascular injury experienced a greater amount of blood loss than those who did not (227.5 ± 147.28 vs. 59.32 ± 68.30 ml) (p = 0.11). In our systematic review of 63 articles, major vascular injury occurred in 0-15.4% and minor vascular injury occurred in 0-6% of lateral lumbar fusions. The systematic review and comparative study demonstrate an increased rate of vascular injury in OLIF when compared to LLIF. However, vascular injuries in either procedure are rare, and this study aids previous literature to support the safety of both approaches., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)