ABSTRACT
Occipital condyle (OC) screws are an alternative cephalad fixation point in occipitocervical fusion. Safe placement of occipital, C1 lateral mass, and C2 pars screws have been described previously, but not OC screws. The craniocervical junction is complex, and a thorough understanding of the anatomy is needed. Three-dimensional (3D) image-guided navigation was used in six patients. There were no complications related to image-guided navigation during the placement of 12 OC screws and we found that this navigation can serve as a useful adjunct when placing an OC screw. Technical considerations of placing OC and C1 lateral mass screws are discussed with particular reference to patient positioning and the StealthStation® S7™ image-guided navigational platform (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA). The reference arc is attached to the head-clamp and faces forward. The optical camera and monitor are positioned at the head of the table for a direct, non-obstructed line-of-sight. To minimize intersegmental movement, the OC should not be drilled until all other screws have been placed. We conclude that 3D image-guided navigation is a useful adjunct that can be safely and effectively used for placement of instrumentation of the upper cervical spine including the OC.
Subject(s)
Atlanto-Occipital Joint/diagnostic imaging , Atlanto-Occipital Joint/surgery , Imaging, Three-Dimensional/methods , Neuronavigation/methods , Occipital Bone/diagnostic imaging , Occipital Bone/surgery , Spinal Fusion/methods , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Monitoring, Intraoperative/methods , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Postoperative Complications/physiopathology , Postoperative Complications/prevention & control , Radiography , Spinal Fusion/instrumentationABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To review the clinical outcomes in our patients who have undergone nerve transfer operations for brachial plexus reconstruction at the Louisiana State University (LSU) over a 10-year period. A secondary objective is to compare clinical outcomes in patients who had only nerve transfer operations as compared with patients whose nerve transfers were supplemented with direct repair of brachial plexus elements. METHODS: Retrospective review of the medical records, imaging, and electrodiagnostic studies (electromyographic and nerve conduction studies) of patients with brachial plexus injuries who underwent nerve transfer operations at LSU over a period of 10 years. RESULTS: A total of 81 patients were treated between 1995 to 2005 at the LSU Health Sciences Center; 7 of these patients were lost to follow-up, leaving 74 patients, with an average follow-up of 3.5 years, for review. We evaluated recovery of elbow flexion and shoulder abduction. Ninety percent of patients with medial pectoral to musculocutaneous nerve transfers recovered to LSU grade 2 (Medical Research Council grade 3), and 60% of those patients with intercostal to musculocutaneous nerve transfer regained similar strength in elbow flexion. Shoulder abduction recovery to LSU grade 2 (Medical Research Council grade 3) after spinal accessory to suprascapular and/or thoracodorsal to axillary nerve transfer, was 95% and 36%, respectively. There was a tendency for better motor recovery when nerve transfer operations were combined with direct repair of plexus elements. CONCLUSION: Nerve transfers for repair of brachial plexus injuries result in excellent recovery of elbow and shoulder functions. Patients who had direct repair of brachial plexus elements in addition to nerve transfers tended to do better than those who had only nerve transfer operations.