|
Neurology India, Vol. 59, No. 5, September-October, 2011, pp. 796 Correspondence Authors' reply P Ailawadhi, D Agrawal, GD Satyarthee, D Gupta, S Sinha, AK Mahapatra Department of Neurosurgery, JPN Apex Trauma Centre, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India We thank Dr R Krishnakumar [1] for taking the time to go through our study [2] . However, the study by Kim et al.,[3] also showed an 8% rate of significant pedicle wall violations on postoperative computed tomography scan. This was despite all pedicle screw insertions being performed by 'experts'. Even in the study by Parker et al, [4] there was a 1.7% pedicle breach rate with eight patients having to undergo repeat surgery for the removal of these screws. From a patient's perspective, a hospital should aim to maintain consistency of surgical results across patients and across surgeons. O-arm provides the ability for even novice surgeons to get results similar to experts consistently. It also provides simulated training on real patients (not on cadavers or sawbone models) which is unparalleled in spine surgery. We believe that the use of O-arm actually shortens the learning curve for freehand pedicle screw insertions and is a valuable tool in any large residency program for spinal surgery. References
Copyright 2011 - Neurology India |
|