RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Multiple solutions for navigation-guided pedicle screw placement are currently available. Intraoperative imaging techniques are invaluable for spinal surgery, but often there is little attention paid to patient radiation exposure. This study aimed to compare the applied radiation doses of sliding gantry CT (SGCT)- and mobile cone-beam CT (CBCT)-based pedicle screw placement for spinal instrumentation. METHODS: The authors retrospectively analyzed 183 and 54 patients who underwent SGCT- or standard CBCT-based pedicle screw placement, respectively, for spinal instrumentation at their department between June 2019 and January 2020. SGCT uses an automated radiation dose adjustment. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics, including the number of screws per patient and the number of instrumented levels, did not significantly differ between the two groups. Although the accuracy of screw placement according to Gertzbein-Robbins classification did not differ between the two groups, more screws had to be revised intraoperatively in the CBCT group (SGCT 2.7% vs CBCT 6.0%, p = 0.0036). Mean (± SD) radiation doses for the first (SGCT 484.0 ± 201.1 vs CBCT 687.4 ± 188.5 mGy*cm, p < 0.0001), second (SGCT 515.8 ± 216.3 vs CBCT 658.3 ± 220.1 mGy*cm, p < 0.0001), third (SGCT 531.3 ± 237.5 vs CBCT 641.6 ± 177.3 mGy*cm, p = 0.0140), and total (SGCT 1216.9 ± 699.3 vs CBCT 2000.3 ± 921.0 mGy*cm, p < 0.0001) scans were significantly lower for SGCT. This was also true for radiation doses per scanned level (SGCT 461.9 ± 429.3 vs CBCT 1004.1 ± 905.1 mGy*cm, p < 0.0001) and radiation doses per screw (SGCT 172.6 ± 110.1 vs CBCT 349.6 ± 273.4 mGy*cm, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The applied radiation doses were significantly lower using SGCT for navigated pedicle screw placement in spinal instrumentation. A modern CT scanner on a sliding gantry leads to lower radiation doses, especially through automated 3D radiation dose adjustment.
Asunto(s)
Tornillos Pediculares , Fusión Vertebral , Cirugía Asistida por Computador , Humanos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Columna Vertebral/cirugía , Tomografía Computarizada de Haz Cónico/métodos , Cirugía Asistida por Computador/métodos , Dosis de Radiación , Fusión Vertebral/métodosRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Multiple solutions for navigation-guided pedicle screw placement are available. However, the efficiency with regard to clinical and resource implications has not yet been analyzed. The present study's aim was to analyze whether an operating room sliding gantry CT (ORCT)-based approach for spinal instrumentation is more efficient than a mobile cone-beam CT (CBCT)-based approach. METHODS: This cohort study included a random sample of 853 patients who underwent spinal instrumentation using ORCT-based or CBCT-based pedicle screw placement due to tumor, degenerative, trauma, infection, or deformity disorders between November 2015 and January 2020. RESULTS: More screws had to be revised intraoperatively in the CBCT group due to insufficient placement (ORCT: 98, 2.8% vs. CBCT: 128, 4.0%; p = 0.0081). The mean time of patients inside the OR (Interval 5 Entry-Exit) was significantly shorter for the ORCT group (ORCT: mean, [95% CI] 256.0, [247.8, 264.3] min, CBCT: 283.0, [274.4, 291.5] min; p < 0.0001) based on shorter times for Interval 2 Positioning-Incision (ORCT: 18.8, [18.1, 19.9] min, CBCT: 33.6, [32.2, 35.5] min; p < 0.0001) and Interval 4 Suture-Exit (ORCT: 24.3, [23.6, 26.1] min, CBCT: 29.3, [27.5, 30.7] min; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The choice of imaging technology for navigated pedicle screw placement has significant impact on standard spine procedures even in a high-volume spine center with daily routine in such devices. Particularly with regard to the duration of surgeries, the shorter time needed for preparation and de-positioning in the ORCT group made the main difference, while the accuracy was even higher for the ORCT.
Asunto(s)
Tornillos Pediculares , Fusión Vertebral , Cirugía Asistida por Computador , Estudios de Cohortes , Tomografía Computarizada de Haz Cónico , Humanos , QuirófanosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To reveal the impact on workflow from introducing a dual-room sliding gantry CT to the trauma room for polytrauma and regularly scheduled in- outpatients with regard to efficiency and degree of capacity utilisation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Time analysis was performed for 30 polytrauma patients each in 2 different trauma room settings, the new trauma room comprising a sliding gantry CT, the old one a stationary single-room CT. Complete trauma room and diagnostic workup times were manually measured and compared for both groups. In a third scenario, the number of CT scans performed with one single sliding gantry CT and the two-room concept was compared to the number of CT scans performed on two separate regular CT units in a 5 days clinical routine sample. RESULTS: Patients demographics and type of CT examinations were comparable for all patient groups. The median time from patient arrival in the trauma room until beginning of CT scanning was 6 min shorter for the sliding gantry CT group (21 vs.15 min). Sliding gantry CT embedded in a two-room solution achieved 252 CT scans in 5 working days, compared to 250 CT scans on two separate regular CT units with the same man power. CONCLUSIONS: Sliding gantry CT in the trauma room allows for significant time saving in the diagnostic workup of polytrauma patients and faster resumption of the regular in- outpatient's CT schedule is possible. With the same man power, the dual-room solution is able to generate the same throughput as two separate CT units.