Complications associated with subaxial placement of pedicle screws versus lateral mass screws in the cervical spine (C2-T1): systematic review and meta-analysis comprising 4,165 patients and 16,669 screws.

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.

The Effect of Proximal Row Carpectomy and Trapeziectomy on First Ray Stability: A Cadaveric Study.

PURPOSE: Wrist and thumb pathology can coexist leading to potential indications for proximal row carpectomy (PRC) and trapeziectomy. In this setting, the axial stability of the first ray is not known. We sought to evaluate axial subsidence of the first metacarpal in cadavers following trapeziectomy and trapeziectomy with PRC to determine the mechanical effects of the procedures performed concurrently. METHODS: Eleven fresh-frozen cadaveric distal forearm specimens were used in this study. The specimens were fixed in cement and mounted to a material test system frame. A predetermined force (20 N) was applied to the thumb metacarpal to simulate forces observed with lateral pinch. Axial displacement of the thumb metacarpal was measured. The application of force was repeated following trapeziectomy on each hand and then again following PRC. Analysis was performed to compare thumb metacarpal subsidence of the 3 groups: native, trapeziectomy, and trapeziectomy with PRC. RESULTS: Before trapeziectomy, native cadaver specimens had an average of 5.1 ± 1.9 mm of thumb metacarpal subsidence under the material test system load (20 N), compared to 16.2 ± 3.4 mm following trapeziectomy, and 25.0 ± 5.5 mm for trapeziectomy with PRC. CONCLUSION: We observed a significant increase in thumb metacarpal subsidence following concurrent trapeziectomy with PRC when compared to trapeziectomy alone. Our results suggest that performing both operations together would lead to a substantial risk of first ray subsidence. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: When treating concurrent basilar thumb and wrist arthritis, it may be more effective to stage the procedures or use a form of thumb metacarpal suspension or arthrodesis.

Complications associated with subaxial placement of pedicle screws versus lateral mass screws in the cervical spine: systematic review and meta-analysis comprising 1768 patients and 8636 screws.

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.