Digital Reference Frame Anchored to the Pedicle Screw–rod Construct for O-arm–Assisted Pedicle Screw Insertion: A Pilot Study

Korawish Mekariya; Chonlatid  Ruangsangthong; Dollaporn  Anopas; Chatupon  Chotigavanichaya; Ekkapoj  Korwutthikulrangsri; Sirichai  Wilartratsami; Werasak  Sutipornpalangkul; Panya  Luksanapruksa; Monchai  Ruangchainikom

doi:10.33192/smj.v78i5.278286

Authors

Korawish Mekariya Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
Chonlatid Ruangsangthong Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
Dollaporn Anopas Biodesign Innovation Center and Siriraj Integrative Center for Neglected Parasitic Diseases, Department of Parasitology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
Chatupon Chotigavanichaya Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
Ekkapoj Korwutthikulrangsri Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
Sirichai Wilartratsami Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
Werasak Sutipornpalangkul Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
Panya Luksanapruksa Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
Monchai Ruangchainikom Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.33192/smj.v78i5.278286

Keywords:

Digital reference frame, O-arm navigation, Pedicle screw placement, Pilot study, Spinal surgery

Abstract

Objective: Accurate pedicle screw placement reduces neurological injury and complications. Although O-arm navigation improves precision, navigation error and digital reference frame (DRF) instability persist. This study aims to develop and evaluate a novel DRF anchored to the pedicle screw–rod construct as an alternative to spinous process–based attachment for O-arm–assisted pedicle screw insertion.

Materials and Methods: This pilot study enrolled patients undergoing O-arm–assisted thoracolumbar pedicular screw instrumentation between November 2024 and February 2025. At each instrumented level, one pedicle screw was placed using the conventional DRF, and the contralateral pedicle screw was placed using the novel pedicle screw–rod–anchored DRF. We compared the 2 DRF systems within each level. Navigational error was defined as the angular deviation between the intraoperative virtual trajectory and the screw position on postoperative computed tomography. Pedicle breaches were identified and graded.

Results: Twenty-two patients (110 pedicle screws) were included. The median navigational error did not differ between novel and conventional DRF in axial (2°, P = 0.500) or sagittal (2°, P = 0.070) planes. Subgroup analyses by level and pathology (degenerative, tumor, trauma) showed no significant differences. Minor pedicle breaches (< 2 mm) occurred in 2 screws with the novel DRF and 3 screws with the conventional DRF, all mid-thoracic and without clinical complications.

Conclusions: The novel pedicle screw–rod–anchored DRF provides navigational accuracy comparable to the conventional system. These findings support its feasibility as an alternative reference frame for O-arm–guided spinal procedures when spinous process fixation is limited.

References

Cho W, Cho SK, Wu C. The biomechanics of pedicle screw-based instrumentation. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2010;92-B(8):1061-5.

Rose PS, Lenke LG, Bridwell KH, Mulconrey DS, Cronen GA, Buchowski JM, et al. Pedicle Screw Instrumentation for Adult Idiopathic Scoliosis. Spine. 2009;34(8):852-7.

Amiot L-P, Lang K, Putzier M, Zippel H, Labelle H. Comparative Results Between Conventional and Computer-Assisted Pedicle Screw Installation in the Thoracic, Lumbar, and Sacral Spine. Spine. 2000;25(5):606-14.

Gelalis ID, Paschos NK, Pakos EE, Politis AN, Arnaoutoglou CM, Karageorgos AC, et al. Accuracy of pedicle screw placement: a systematic review of prospective in vivo studies comparing free hand, fluoroscopy guidance and navigation techniques. Eur Spine J. 2012;21(2):247-55.

Hicks JM, Singla A, Shen FH, Arlet V. Complications of Pedicle Screw Fixation in Scoliosis Surgery. Spine. 2010;35(11):E465-E70.

Alomari S, Lubelski D, Lehner K, Tang A, Wolinsky J-P, Theodore N, et al. Safety and Accuracy of Freehand Pedicle Screw Placement and the Role of Intraoperative O-arm: A Single Institution Experience. Spine. 2022.

Sun J, Wu D, Wang Q, Wei Y, Yuan F. Pedicle Screw Insertion: Is O-Arm–Based Navigation Superior to the Conventional Freehand Technique? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. World Neurosurg. 2020;144:e87-e99.

Oertel MF, Hobart J, Stein M, Schreiber V, Scharbrodt W. Clinical and methodological precision of spinal navigation assisted by 3D intraoperative O-arm radiographic imaging. J Neurosurg Spine. 2011;14(4):532-6.

Silbermann J, Riese F, Allam Y, Reichert T, Koeppert H, Gutberlet M. Computer tomography assessment of pedicle screw placement in lumbar and sacral spine: comparison between free-hand and O-arm based navigation techniques. Eur Spine J. 2011;20(6):875-81.

Zhao J, Jiang H, Zhuge Y, Gao R, Wang C, Ma J, et al. Risk Factors for the Drift Phenomenon in O‐arm Navigation‐Assisted Pedicle Screw Placement during Spinal Deformity Surgery. Orthop Surg. 2023;15(1):118-23.

Guha D, Jakubovic R, Gupta S, Fehlings MG, Mainprize TG, Yee A, et al. Intraoperative Error Propagation in 3-Dimensional Spinal Navigation From Nonsegmental Registration: A Prospective Cadaveric and Clinical Study. Global Spine J. 2019;9(5):512-20.

Tauchi R, Imagama S, Sakai Y, Ito Z, Ando K, Muramoto A, et al. The correlation between cervical range of motion and misplacement of cervical pedicle screws during cervical posterior spinal fixation surgery using a CT-based navigation system. Eur Spine J. 2013;22(7):1504-8.

Roberts SB, Tsirikos AI. Paediatric Spinal Deformity Surgery: Complications and Their Management. Healthcare (Basel). 2022;10(12):2519.

Kotani Y, Abumi K, Ito M, Takahata M, Sudo H, Ohshima S, et al. Accuracy analysis of pedicle screw placement in posterior scoliosis surgery: comparison between conventional fluoroscopic and computer-assisted technique. Spine. 2007;32(14):1543-50.

Mirza SK, Wiggins GC, Kuntz Iv C, York JE, Bellabarba C, Knonodi MA, et al. Accuracy of thoracic vertebral body screw placement using standard fluoroscopy, fluoroscopic image guidance, and computed tomographic image guidance: a cadaver study. Spine. 2003;28(4):402-13.

Viechtbauer W, Smits L, Kotz D, Budé L, Spigt M, Serroyen J, et al. A simple formula for the calculation of sample size in pilot studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2015;68(11):1375-9.

Mathew JE, Mok K, Goulet B. Pedicle violation and Navigational errors in pedicle screw insertion using the intraoperative O-arm: A preliminary report. Int J Spine Surg. 2013;7:e88-94.

Kamimura M, Ebara S, Itoh H, Tateiwa Y, Kinoshita T, Takaoka K. Accurate pedicle screw insertion under the control of a computer-assisted image guiding system: laboratory test and clinical study. J Orthop Sci. 1999;4(3):197-206.

Jin M, Liu Z, Qiu Y, Yan H, Han X, Zhu Z. Incidence and risk factors for the misplacement of pedicle screws in scoliosis surgery assisted by O-arm navigation-analysis of a large series of one thousand, one hundred and forty five screws. Int Orthop. 2017;41(4):773-80.

Jin M, Liu Z, Liu X, Yan H, Han X, Qiu Y, et al. Does intraoperative navigation improve the accuracy of pedicle screw placement in the apical region of dystrophic scoliosis secondary to neurofibromatosis type I: comparison between O-arm navigation and free-hand technique. Eur Spine J. 2016;25(6):1729-37.

Rivkin MA, Yocom SS. Thoracolumbar instrumentation with CT-guided navigation (O-arm) in 270 consecutive patients: accuracy rates and lessons learned. Neurosurg Focus. 2014;36(3):E7.