Lateral mass fixation in subaxial cervical spine: anatomic review

Elrahmany Mohamed, Zidan Ihab, Anwar Moaz, Nabawi Ayman, Abo-Elw Haitham, Elrahmany Mohamed, Zidan Ihab, Anwar Moaz, Nabawi Ayman, Abo-Elw Haitham

Abstract

Introduction The cervical spine is a highly mobile segment of the spinal column, liable to a variety of diseases and susceptible to trauma. It is a complex region where many vital structures lie in close proximity. Lateral mass screw fixation has become the method of choice in stabilizing subaxial cervical spine among other posterior cervical fixation techniques whenever the posterior elements are absent or compromised. Objective This study examined cervical specimens of cadavers and cervical computed tomography (CT) scans to minimize as much as possible complications of cervical lateral mass screw placement such as vertebral artery or nerve root injuries, facet joint violations, or inadequate placement. Methods Forty normal cervical CT scans, obtained from the emergency unit as part of the trauma workup, were included in this study plus 10 cervical cadaveric specimens obtained from the Alexandria Neuro-anatomy laboratory. There were three fixed parameters for screw insertion in this study. First, the point of screw insertion was the midpoint of the lateral mass; it was the crossing point between the sagittal and axial planes of the posterior cortex of the lateral mass. Second, the direction of the screw in the craniocaudal plane was 30 degrees cranially to avoid facet joint penetration. Third, the exit point of the screw was located on the ventral cortex of the lateral mass just lateral to the root of the transverse process in the midaxial cut of each lateral mass, to make a sound bicortical fixation without injuring the vertebral artery or the nerve root. The selected screw trajectory in this study was the line drawn between the inlet and exit points. The depth and width of the lateral mass of the cervical vertebrae from C3 to C7 were measured as well as the angle of screw trajectory from the sagittal plane. All these measures were applied on the cadaveric specimens to make sure that no injury to the vertebral artery, nerve root, or facet joint occurred. Results As regards the collected measurements of the lateral mass of all subaxial cervical vertebrae, the study revealed that the average depth of the lateral mass was 12.83 ± 1.28 mm. The average width of the lateral mass was 11.92 ± 0.96 mm. The average divergent angle of bicortical screw insertion without injury to the vertebral artery or the nerve root was 19.51 ± 1.83 degrees. As regard the cadaveric specimens, based on all the collected measurements taken from the CT scans, there was no reported injury to the vertebral arteries or nerve roots or penetration to the facet joints. Conclusion Lateral mass fixation can be applied easily and safely for all levels of subaxial cervical spine from C3 to C6 with the following parameters: (1) the point of entry is the midpoint of the lateral mass; (2) the screw trajectory is directed 30 degrees cranially and 20 degrees laterally; (3) the screw length is 13 to 15 mm.

Keywords: facet joint; lateral mass fixation; nerve root; vertebral artery.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Cervical computed tomography scans showing the sagittal, coronal, and axial views of the lateral masses of the cervical vertebrae.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Posterior view of the first three cervical vertebrae with illustration of the left lateral mass of C3 showing its midpoint.
Figure 3
Figure 3
The midsagittal cut of the lateral masses of the cervical computed tomography scan showing the selected plane for screw trajectory, which is tilted 30 degrees cranially in the craniocaudal plane.
Figure 4
Figure 4
The selected midaxial cut of the computed tomography scan in this study showing the exit point of the screw and its relation with the vertebral artery and nerve root.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Lateral view of the cervical specimen showing the screw being inserted in the midpoint of the lateral mass, oriented 30 degrees upward, and its exit point just lateral to the transverse process.

References

    1. Davenport M Mueller J B Belaval E Roy S P Fracture, cervical spine Available at: . Accessed April 1, 2008
    1. Jónsson H Jr, Rauschning W. Anatomical and morphometric studies in posterior cervical spinal screw-plate systems. J Spinal Disord. 1994;7:429–438.
    1. Hadra B E. Wiring of the vertebrae as a means of immobilization in fracture and Potts' disease. 1981. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007;460:11–13.
    1. Rogers W A. Treatment of fracture dislocation of cervical spine. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1942;24:245–258.
    1. Bohlman H H. Surgical management of cervical spine fractures and dislocations. Instr Course Lect. 1985;34:163–187.
    1. Roy-Camille R, Saillant G, Mazel C. Philadelphia: JB Lippincott; 1989. Internal fixation of the unstable cervical spine by a posterior osteosynthesis with plate and screw. In: Cervical Spine Research Society, ed. The Cervical Spine. 2nd ed; pp. 390–403.
    1. Grob D, Magerl F. Dorsal spondylolisthesis of the cervical spine using a hooked plate. Orthopade. 1987;16(1):55–61.
    1. McCullen G M, Garfin S R. Spine update: cervical spine internal fixation using screw and screw-plate constructs. Spine. 2000;25:643–652.
    1. Heller J G, Silcox DH III, Sutterlin CE III. Complications of posterior cervical plating. Spine. 1995;20:2442–2448.
    1. Ebraheim N A, Toledo O H. Posterior lateral mass screw fixation: anatomic and radiographic considerations. The University of Pennsylvania Orthopedic Journal. 1999;12:66–72.
    1. Xu R, Ebraheim N A. Essential bony anatomy of the cervical spine relative to instrumentation. Neurosurgery Quarterly. 1998;8(3):172–179.
    1. Roy-Camille R, Saillant G, Laville C. et al.Treatment of lower cervical spine injuries—C3 to C7. Spine. 1992;17(10S):S442–S446.
    1. Anderson P A, Henley M B, Grady M S, Montesano P X, Winn H R. Posterior cervical arthrodesis with AO reconstruction plates and bone graft. Spine. 1991;16(3, Suppl):S72–S79.
    1. An H S, Coppes M A. Posterior cervical fixation for fracture and degenerative disc disease. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1997;335:101–111.
    1. Xu R, Haman S P, Ebraheim N A, Yeasting R A. The anatomic relation of lateral mass screws to the spinal nerves. A comparison of the Magerl, Anderson, and An techniques. Spine. 1999;24:2057–2061.
    1. Fehlings M G, Cooper P R, Errico T J. Posterior plates in the management of cervical instability: long-term results in 44 patients. J Neurosurg. 1994;81:341–349.
    1. Merola A A, Castro B A, Alongi P R. et al.Anatomic considerations for standard and modified techniques of cervical lateral mass screw placement. The Spine Journal. 2002;2:430–435.
    1. Cho J I, Kim D H. Comparative analysis of cervical lateral mass screw insertion among three techniques in the Korean population by quantitative measurements with reformatted 2D CT scan images. J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2008;44:124–130.
    1. Yoon S H, Park H C, Park H S. et al.Radiological considerations of posterior cervical lateral mass fixation using plate and screw. Yonsei Med J. 2004;45:406–412.
    1. Bayley E, Zia Z, Kerslake R. et al.Lamina-guided lateral mass screw placement in the subaxial cervical spine. Eur Spine J. 2010;19(4):660–664.
    1. Stemper B D, Marawar S V, Yoganandan N, Shender B S, Rao R D. Quantitative anatomy of subaxial cervical lateral mass: an analysis of safe screw lengths for Roy-Camille and Magerl techniques. Spine. 2008;33:893–897.
    1. Giles LGF, Singer K P. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann; 1998. The Clinical Anatomy and Management of Back Pain Series. Vol. 3: Clinical Anatomy and Management of Cervical Spine Pain; pp. 1–39.
    1. Heller J G, Silcox DH III, Sutterlin CE III. Complications of posterior cervical plating. Spine. 1995;20:2442–2448.

Source: PubMed

3
購読する