Pedicle subtraction osteotomy with patient-specific instruments

Marco D Burkhard; Daniel Suter; Bastian Sigrist; Philipp Fuernstahl; Mazda Farshad; José Miguel Spirig

doi:10.1016/j.xnsj.2021.100075

Pedicle subtraction osteotomy with patient-specific instruments

N Am Spine Soc J. 2021 Aug 29:7:100075. doi: 10.1016/j.xnsj.2021.100075. eCollection 2021 Sep.

Authors

Marco D Burkhard¹, Daniel Suter², Bastian Sigrist², Philipp Fuernstahl², Mazda Farshad^{1

3}, José Miguel Spirig^{1

3}

Affiliations

¹ Department of Orthopedics, Balgrist University Hospital, University of Zurich, Switzerland.
² Research in Orthopedic Computer Science (ROCS), University Hospital Balgrist, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
³ University Spine Center Zürich, Balgrist University Hospital, University of Zurich, Switzerland.

Abstract

Background: Although the utility of patient-specific instruments (PSI) has been well established for complex osteotomies in orthopedic surgery, it is yet to be comparatively analyzed for complex spinal deformity correction, such as pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO).

Methods: Six thoracolumbar human cadavers were used to perform nine PSOs using the free-hand (FH) technique and nine with PSI (in total 18 PSOs). Osteotomy planes were planned on the basis of preoperative computed tomography (CT). A closing-wedge angle of 30° was targeted for each PSO. Postoperative CT scans were obtained to measure segmental lordosis correction and the deviation from the planned 30° correction as well as the osseous gap of posterior elements.

Results: The time required to perform a PSO was 18:22 (range 10:22-26:38) min and 14:14 (range 10:13-22:16) min in the PSI and FH groups, respectively (p = 0.489). The PSI group had a significantly higher lordosis gain (29°, range 23-31° vs. 21°, range 13-34°; p = 0.015). The lordosis gain was significantly more accurate with PSI (deviation angle: 1°; range 0-7°) than with the FH technique (9°; range 4-17°; p = 0.003). PSI achieved a significantly smaller residual osseous gap of the posterior elements (5 mm; range 0-9 mm) than the FH group (11 mm; range 3-27 mm; p = 0.043).With PSI, an angular difference of 3° (range 1-12°), a translational offset of 1 (range 0-6) mm at the level of the lamina, and a vertebral body entry point deviation of 1 (range 0-4) mm was achieved in the osteotomies.

Conclusions: PSI-guided PSO can be a more feasible and accurate approach in achieving a planned lordosis angle than the traditional FH technique in a cadaver model. This approach further reduced osseous gaps, potentially promoting higher fusion rates in vivo.

Keywords: 3D-print; Patient-specific; Pedicle subtraction osteotomy; Sagittal imbalance; Spinal osteotomy; Spine.