Comparing radiation dose of image-guided techniques in lumbar fusion surgery with pedicle screw insertion; A systematic review.

Background Context: Fluoroscopic devices can be used to visualize subcutaneous and osseous tissue, a useful feature during pedicle screw insertion in lumbar fusion surgery. It is important that both patient and surgeon are exposed as little as possible, since these devices use potential harmful ionizing radiation. Purpose: This study aims to compare radiation exposure of different image-guided techniques in lumbar fusion surgery with pedicle screw insertion. Study Design: Systematic review. Methods: Cochrane, Embase, PubMed and Web of Science databases were used to acquire relevant studies. Eligibility criteria were lumbar and/or sacral spine, pedicle screw, mGray and/or Sievert and/or mrem, radiation dose and/or radiation exposure. Image-guided techniques were divided in five groups: conventional C-arm, C-arm navigation, C-arm robotic, O-arm navigation and O-arm robotic. Comparisons were made based on effective dose for patients and surgeons, absorbed dose for patients and surgeons and exposure. Risk of bias was assessed using the 2017 Cochrane Risk of Bias tool on RCTs and the Cochrane ROBINS-I tool on NRCTs. Level of evidence was assessed using the guidelines of Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine 2011. Results: A total of 1423 studies were identified of which 38 were included in the analysis and assigned to one of the five groups. Results of radiation dose per procedure and per pedicle screw were described in dose ranges. Conventional C-arm appeared to result in higher effective dose for surgeons, higher absorbed dose for patients and higher exposure, compared to C-arm navigation/robotic and O-arm navigation/robotic. Level of evidence was 3 to 4 in 29 studies. Risk of bias of RCTs was intermediate, mostly due to inadequate blinding. Overall risk of bias score in NRCTs was determined as 'serious'. Conclusions: Ranges of radiation doses using different modalities during pedicle screw insertion in lumbar fusion surgery are wide. Based on the highest numbers in the ranges, conventional C-arm tends to lead to a higher effective dose for surgeons, higher absorbed dose for patients and higher exposure, compared to C-arm-, and O-arm navigation/robotic. The level of evidence is low and risk of bias is fairly high. In future studies, heterogeneity should be limited by standardizing measurement methods and thoroughly describing the image-guided technique settings.

Reliability and Clinical Usefulness of Current Classifications in Traumatic Thoracolumbar Fractures: A Systematic Review of the Literature.

BACKGROUND: A validated classification remains the key to an appropriate treatment algorithm of traumatic thoracolumbar fractures. Considering the development of many classifications, it is remarkable that consensus about treatment is still lacking. We conducted a systematic review to investigate which classification can be used best for treatment decision making in thoracolumbar fractures. METHODS: A comprehensive search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane using the following search terms: classification (mesh), spinal fractures (mesh), and corresponding synonyms. All hits were viewed by 2 independent researchers. Papers were included if analyzing the reliability (kappa values) and clinical usefulness (specificity or sensitivity of an algorithm) of currently most used classifications (Magerl/AO, thoracolumbar injury classification and severity score [TLICS] or thoracolumbar injury severity score, and the new AO spine). RESULTS: Twenty articles are included. The presented kappa values indicate moderate to substantial agreement for all 3 classifications. Regarding the clinical usefulness, > 90% agreement between actual treatment and classification recommendation is reported for most fractures. However, it appears that over 50% of the patients with a stable burst fracture (TLICS 2, AO-A3/A4) in daily practice are operated, so in these cases treatment decision is not primarily based on classification. CONCLUSION: AO, TLICS, and new AO spine classifications have acceptable accuracy (kappa > 0.4), but are limited in clinical usefulness since the treatment recommendation is not always implemented in clinical practice. Differences in treatment decision making arise from several causes, such as surgeon and patient preferences and prognostic factors that are not included in classifications yet. The recently validated thoracolumbar AO spine injury score seems promising for use in clinical practice, because of inclusion of patient-specific modifiers. Future research should prove its definite value in treatment decision making. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Without the appropriate treatment, the impact of traumatic thoracolumbar fractures can be devastating. Therefore it is important to achieve consensus in the treatment of thoracolumbar fractures.

Multifocal giant cell tumor of the tendon sheath: case report and literature review.

In this study, we present the rare case of a patient with a multifocal giant cell tumor of the tendon sheath occurring at three different localizations along the same tendon. We review radiographic, ultrasonographic, and magnetic resonance imaging findings, and discuss previously reported cases.

Radiographic measurement of the distal tibiofibular syndesmosis has limited use.

Radiographs of 20 plastinated human cadaveric lower legs were obtained in 12 positions of rotation to determine the optimal parameter for reliable assessment of syndesmotic and ankle integrity, and to assess the effect of positioning of the ankle on this parameter. Three observers measured eight parameters twice after four repetitions of ankle positioning. Intraclass correlation coefficients and reproducibility were assessed. Some tibiofibular overlap was present in all radiographs in any position of rotation. The medial clear space was smaller than or equal to the superior clear space in all radiographs. Intraclass correlation coefficients of the other parameters were too weak for reliable quantitative measurements, as was shown with a mixed model analysis of variance. This resulted from the inability to reproduce ankle positioning, even under optimal laboratory circumstances. This study shows that no optimal radiographic parameter exists to assess syndesmotic integrity. Tibiofibular overlap and medial and superior clear space are the most useful, because one-sided traumatic absence of tibiofibular overlap may be an indication of syndesmotic injury, and a medial clear space larger than a superior clear space is indicative of deltoid injury. Additional quantitative measurement of all syndesmotic parameters with repeated radiographs of the ankle cannot be done reliably and therefore are of little value.