An Official publication of The Asian Congress of Neurological Surgeons (AsianCNS)

Search Article
Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Advertise Subscribe Contacts Login  Facebook Tweeter
  Users Online: 292 Home Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size  

   Table of Contents      
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2013  |  Volume : 8  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 153-156

Percutaneous pedicle screw placement in the thoracic spine: A cadaveric study


1 Department of Surgery, Division of Neurosurgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA
2 Department of Neurological Surgery, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA

Date of Web Publication20-Nov-2013

Correspondence Address:
Shahid M Nimjee
Duke University Medical Center, Box 3807, Durham, NC 27710
USA
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: Internal funding from duke university medical center, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/1793-5482.121687

Rights and Permissions
  Abstract 

Study Design: A cadaveric study to determine the accuracy of percutaneous screw placement in the thoracic spine using standard fluoroscopic guidance.
Summary of Background Data: While use of percutaneous pedicle screws in the lumbar spine has increased rapidly, its acceptance in the thoracic spine has been slower. As indications for pedicle screw fixation increase in the thoracic spine so will the need to perform accurate and safe placement of percutaneous screws with or without image navigation. To date, no study has determined the accuracy of percutaneous thoracic pedicle screw placement without use of stereotactic imaging guidance.
Materials and Methods: Eighty-six thoracic pedicle screw placements were performed in four cadaveric thoracic spines from T1 to T12. At each level, Ferguson anterior-posterior fluoroscopy was used to localize the pedicle and define the entry point. Screw placement was attempted unless the borders of the pedicle could not be delineated solely using intraoperative fluoroscopic guidance. The cadavers were assessed using pre- and postprocedural computed tomography (CT) scans as well as dissected and visually inspected in order to determine the medial breach rate.
Results: Ninety pedicles were attempted and 86 screws were placed. CT analysis of screw placement accuracy revealed that only one screw (1.2%) breached the medial aspect of the pedicle by more than 2 mm. A total of four screws (4.7%) were found to have breached medially by visual inspection (three Grade 1 and one Grade 2). One (1.2%) lateral breach was greater than 2 mm and no screw violated the neural foramen. The correlation coefficient of pedicle screw violations and pedicle diameter was found to be 0.96.
Conclusions: This cadaveric study shows that percutaneous pedicle screw placement can be performed in the thoracic spine without a significant increase in the pedicle breach rate as compared with standard open techniques. A small percentage (4.4%) of pedicles, especially high in the thoracic spine, may not be safely visualized.

Keywords: Minimally invasive surgery, pedicle screw, thoracic spine


How to cite this article:
Hardin CA, Nimjee SM, Karikari IO, Agrawal A, Fessler RG, Isaacs RE. Percutaneous pedicle screw placement in the thoracic spine: A cadaveric study. Asian J Neurosurg 2013;8:153-6

How to cite this URL:
Hardin CA, Nimjee SM, Karikari IO, Agrawal A, Fessler RG, Isaacs RE. Percutaneous pedicle screw placement in the thoracic spine: A cadaveric study. Asian J Neurosurg [serial online] 2013 [cited 2021 Apr 20];8:153-6. Available from: https://www.asianjns.org/text.asp?2013/8/3/153/121687


  Introduction Top


Advances in minimally invasive procedures have enabled surgeons to minimize damage to the contiguous tissues, leading to positive outcomes including shorter operating periods, faster postoperative patient mobilization, reduced blood loss as well as less muscle trauma and postoperative pain. [1],[2],[3],[4],[5],[6] Various forms of image navigation have contributed to the evolution of spine surgery. Surgical guidance tools are becoming more accessible and intuitive; however, these aids cannot make up for deficiencies in a surgeon's skill, experience and knowledge of spinal anatomy. If the movement toward performing progressively more complex surgeries through minimally invasive techniques is to continue, surgeons must seek more ways to perform spinal instrumentation through percutaneous or "mini-open" procedures.

Percutaneous placement of pedicle screws in the lumbar spine has been increasing rapidly for a wide range of surgical indications, [1],[3],[6],[7],[8] but this method has been slower to gain acceptance in the thoracic spine. Recent studies have shown that thoracic transpedicular screw fixation is a viable surgical option for a variety of diagnoses, including kyphotic deformity, [9],[10] tumor, [11],[12] fracture [13],[14] as well as adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. [15],[16] The potential for screw placement malposition and neurological complications is higher due to the adjacent structures and the diminutive pedicle size in this region. [17],[18],[19] The evaluation of the current surgical techniques, including methods of image-navigation, is imperative to ensure that these types of procedures are not limited to the most distal aspect of the spine.

Since the origin of image-guided spinal navigation, there has been much controversy regarding the proper manner of performing pedicle screw placement. Computed tomography (CT) navigation has proven to be popular among surgeons. [20] Although CT navigation can provide an accurate depiction of spine anatomy and reduce the radiation exposure, significant preoperative planning and experience is required. [21],[22] Additional arguments have been made that the complexities of spinal surgeries demand three-dimensional (3D) imaging assistance. [19],[23],[24],[25] To date, no study has determined the accuracy of percutaneous thoracic pedicle screw placement using solely two-dimensional (2D) standard fluoroscopy. This study was used to test the feasibility and safety of placing thoracic pedicle screws through the entire extent of the thoracic spine using a percutaneous technique in a cadaveric model.


  Materials and Methods Top


Surgical procedure

Pedicle screws were placed percutaneously in the thoracic spines of four cadavers with intact torsos from T1 to T12. A fluoroscopically guided technique, similar to that used for vertebroplasty, was used to localize the pedicle. The superolateral aspect of the pedicle was defined as the entry point. A transpedicular route was used in all cases, even when the cannulated screws utilized exceeded pedicle size. In these cases, we approached the pedicle tangentially, allowing for a small lateral breach while minimizing potential disruption of the medial cortex. Pedicle screws were placed at all levels accessible, with several levels skipped as they were used to test other percutaneous thoracic techniques. Two upper thoracic levels (T1 and T2) in one cadaver were skipped due to the inability to adequately visualize the anatomy radiographically.

Anterior-posterior (AP) fluoroscopy was used initially. The gantry was adjusted to align to the upper endplate of the vertebra and rotated to position the spinous process midway between the pedicles. A Jamsheedi needle was then placed bilaterally, entering the pedicle at the 3 o'clock position on the right (9 o'clock on the left). Serial AP and lateral images were taken as the Jamsheedi was advanced, with the goal being to place the tip within the midline of the pedicle as the lateral image revealed entry into the vertebral body. Once the pedicle was cannulated, a K-wire was guided through the Jamsheedi into the body. A 5.5 mm tap and 5.5 mm polyaxial screw (M-8, Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Memphis, TN, USA) followed, guided into the vertebral body by the K-wire. The screw was then removed and the path was casted with Plaster of Paris to minimize streak artifact on the postprocedural CT images. CT was the image modality of choice because the clarity of the image allows for precise measurement of pedicle diameter and screw placement within 1 mm. [26]

The cadavers were assessed using pre- and postprocedural CT scans. These images were evaluated by two independent radiographers to determine screw containment and rate of misplacement. Additionally, each cadaveric spine was also dissected and visually inspected in order to determine the medial breach rate. Gross inspection of the medial pedicle wall was performed after laminectomy and removal of the thecal sac. Transpedicular screw malposition was categorized according to the system of Mirza et al. [27] Essentially, there were three classes of malposition: Grade 1 (<2 mm), Grade 2 (2-4 mm) or Grade 3 (>4 mm). The effect of vertebral level on breach rate was determined and the influence of pedicle diameter was evaluated using the Pearson correlation coefficient [Table 1].
Table 1: Medial breach rates categorized by grade and evaluation method

Click here to view



  Results Top


Percutaneous transpedicular screw fixation was attempted on 90 pedicles and 86 (96%) screws were placed. Fixation was aborted on four pedicles (levels T1 and T2, on a single cadaver) because they were not clearly visualized by AP fluoroscopy. Postinstrumentation CT scans, followed by anatomic dissections, were used to evaluate the screw breach rates and the orientation relative to the pedicle axis [Figure 1].
Figure 1: Reconstructed computed tomography scan images showing accurate placement of percutaneous thoracic pedicle screws. Axial views of characteristic low (a) and middle (b and c) thoracic vertebrae. Sagittal view (d) of all attempted levels within the thoracic spine

Click here to view


On CT imaging, six (7%) screw trajectories abutted or breached the medial cortical wall (Grade 1) and one (1.2%) screw trajectory breached between 2 and 4 mm (Grade 2). In addition, only one (1.2%) lateral breach was greater than 2 mm and no screw was found to have entered the neural foramen. Under direct inspection following laminectomy and removal of the canal contents, only three of the six presumed lower grade breaches were noted. Therefore, only a total of four (4.7%) screws were found to have breached medially upon visual inspection (one Grade 2 and three Grade 1). This represents a 4.7% incidence of proven medial breach, 3.5% of which was structurally insignificant and 1.2% of which was structurally significant.

All the breaches occurred in the mid-thoracic spine and 100% of the breached pedicles were smaller than the screws used to instrument the spine. There were significant differences in the breach rates between the middle (T5-T8: 12.5% or 4/32) compared with the upper (T1-T4: 0% or 0/28) and lower (T9-T12, 0% or 0/26) thoracic regions, respectively (P < 0.001). The correlation coefficient between pedicle screw violations, as determined by two independent observers by examination of CT scans, and pedicle diameter was found to be 0.96. A significant correlation between pedicle diameter and breach rate was also found (P < 0.0001).


  Discussion Top


Transpedicular screw fixation is becoming more common in spine surgery; however, this procedure is technically challenging and can be fraught with complications, particularly in the thoracic spine. Minimally invasive surgical techniques are proving to result in many benefits for the patient; however, diminished visualization of anatomy can increase intraoperative complications for the surgeon. Accordingly, it is imperative to evaluate varying surgical methods and navigation aids in order to optimize clinical outcomes.

Image navigation systems have been shown to improve the accuracy of transpedicular screw placement, but the debate continues as to whether CT navigation, 3D fluoroscopy or standard 2D fluoroscopy is best. Substantial research suggests that CT navigation improves the accuracy of pedicle screw placement. [28],[29],[30],[31],[32],[33],[34],[35],[36] However, fluoroscopic guidance systems minimize the pre- and intraoperative preparatory steps such as preoperative scanning, data acquisition and patient registration that have prevented the general acceptance of CT navigation. [21],[22] Intraoperative CT-like devices (e.g., Seimen's Iso-C) have simplified the data acquisition steps, but many technical challenges remain in performing minimally invasive spine surgery.

Proper placement of transpedicular screws is imperative to prevent injury of the adjacent neural and vascular elements, and helps maximize the amount of bone surrounding the screw and increases screw purchase. [37] The current study sought to evaluate the accuracy of percutaneous pedicle screw placement using standard 2D fluoroscopy as the means of intraoperative guidance in a cadaveric model. A comprehensive meta-analysis of the current literature on image-guided pedicle screw insertion found that the median accuracy rate of in vitro thoracic transpedicular screw placement using 2D fluoroscopic guidance was 88.6% and that using CT navigation was 92.5%. [20] For this study, an "all-in" transpedicular route was used for every pedicle attempted even when the cannulated screws exceeded the pedicle diameter. Regardless of this, the overall accuracy that we have shown herein (95.3%), with approximately 99% of the screws placed without any significant medial breaches and no screw entering the neural foramen, is comparable to the results cited elsewhere for the thoracic spine.

If surgeons are going to continue the trend of minimally invasive spine fusion, it is imperative to determine the safety of the different instrumentation methods and, at a minimum, replicate the accuracy of the currently accepted techniques. In the case of the current study, a 1.2% rate of structurally significant medial breaches (greater than a 2 mm violation) is noteworthy as it compares favorably with the studies found in the literature. Thus, percutaneous thoracic pedicle screws can be placed accurately under standard fluoroscopic guidance.

The ability to achieve thoracic pedicle screw fixation percutaneously using standard fluoroscopy eliminates the need for complex imaging guidance while avoiding the invasiveness of standard open techniques. This may theoretically lead to decreased operative costs and overall surgical time as well as improved surgical outcomes. At the same time, our data confirms that breach rates, especially in the mid-thoracic spine, are influenced by pedicle diameter. Thus, preoperative CT imaging may be useful in determining the optimal screw size.

 
  References Top

1.Foley KT, Holly LT, Schwender JD. Minimally invasive lumbar fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2003;28 Suppl 15:S26-35.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.Isaacs RE, Podichetty VK, Santiago P, Sandhu FA, Spears J, Kelly K, et al. Minimally invasive microendoscopy-assisted transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with instrumentation. J Neurosurg Spine 2005;3:98-105.  Back to cited text no. 2
[PUBMED]    
3.Khoo LT, Palmer S, Laich DT, Fessler RG. Minimally invasive percutaneous posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Neurosurgery 2002;51 Suppl 5:S166-1.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.Maciejczak A, Barnas P, Dudziak P, Jagiello-Bajer B, Litwora B, Sumara M. Posterior keyhole corpectomy with percutaneous pedicle screw stabilization in the surgical management of lumbar burst fractures. Neurosurgery 2007;60 Suppl 2:232-42.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.Ringel F, Stoffel M, Stuer C, Meyer B. Minimally invasive transmuscular pedicle screw fixation of the thoracic and lumbar spine. Neurosurgery 2006;59 Suppl 2:ONS361-7.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.Scheufler KM, Dohmen H, Vougioukas VI. Percutaneous transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of degenerative lumbar instability. Neurosurgery 2007;60 Suppl 2:203-13.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.Foley KT, Gupta SK. Percutaneous pedicle screw fixation of the lumbar spine: Preliminary clinical results. J Neurosurg 2002;97 Suppl 1:7-12.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.Powers CJ, Isaacs RE. Minimally invasive fusion and fixation techniques. Neurosurg Clin N Am 2006;17:477-89.  Back to cited text no. 8
[PUBMED]    
9.Rajasekaran S, Vidyadhara S, Ramesh P, Shetty AP. Randomized clinical study to compare the accuracy of navigated and non-navigated thoracic pedicle screws in deformity correction surgeries. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2007;32:E56-64.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.Wu SS, Hwa SY, Lin LC, Pai WM, Chen PQ, Au MK. Management of rigid post-traumatic kyphosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1996;21:2260- 7.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.Jonsson B, Sjostrom L, Olerud C, Andreasson I, Bring J, Rauschning W. Outcome after limited posterior surgery for thoracic and lumbar spine metastases. Eur Spine J 1996;5:36-44.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.Street J, Fisher C, Sparkes J, Boyd M, Kwon B, Paquette S, et al. Single-stage posterolateral vertebrectomy for the management of metastatic disease of the thoracic and lumbar spine: A prospective study of an evolving surgical technique. J Spinal Disord Tech 2007;20:509-20.  Back to cited text no. 12
[PUBMED]    
13.Sasso RC, Cotler HB, Reuben JD. Posterior fixation of thoracic and lumbar spine fractures using DC plates and pedicle screws. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1991;16 Suppl 3:S134-9.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.Xu Y, Zhou X, Yu C, Cheng M, Dong Q, Qian Z. Effectiveness of postural and instrumental reduction in the treatment of thoracolumbar vertebra fracture. Int Orthop 2008;32:361-5.  Back to cited text no. 14
[PUBMED]    
15.Liljenqvist UR, Halm HF, Link TM. Pedicle screw instrumentation of the thoracic spine in idiopathic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1997;22:2239-45.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.Suk SI, Lee CK, Kim WJ, Chung YJ, Park YB. Segmental pedicle screw fixation in the treatment of thoracic idiopathic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1995;20:1399-405.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.Panjabi MM, O'Holleran JD, Crisco JJ 3 rd , Kothe R. Complexity of the thoracic spine pedicle anatomy. Eur Spine J 1997;6:19-24.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.Vougioukas VI, Weber J, Scheufler KM. Clinical and radiological results after parapedicular screw fixation of the thoracic spine. J Neurosurg Spine 2005;3:283-7.  Back to cited text no. 18
[PUBMED]    
19.Youkilis AS, Quint DJ, McGillicuddy JE, Papadopoulos SM. Stereotactic navigation for placement of pedicle screws in the thoracic spine. Neurosurgery 2001;48:771-9.  Back to cited text no. 19
[PUBMED]    
20.Tian NF, Xu HZ. Image-guided pedicle screw insertion accuracy: A meta-analysis. Int Orthop 2009;33:895-903.  Back to cited text no. 20
[PUBMED]    
21.Choi WW, Green BA, Levi AD. Computer-assisted fluoroscopic targeting system for pedicle screw insertion. Neurosurgery 2000;47:872-8.  Back to cited text no. 21
[PUBMED]    
22.Fu TS, Wong CB, Tsai TT, Liang YC, Chen LH, Chen WJ. Pedicle screw insertion: Computed tomography versus fluoroscopic image guidance. Int Orthop 2008;32:517-21.  Back to cited text no. 22
[PUBMED]    
23.Acosta FL Jr., Thompson TL, Campbell S, Weinstein PR, Ames CP. Use of intraoperative isocentric C-arm 3D fluoroscopy for sextant percutaneous pedicle screw placement: Case report and review of the literature. Spine J 2005;5:339-43.  Back to cited text no. 23
    
24.Holly LT, Foley KT. Three-dimensional fluoroscopy-guided percutaneous thoracolumbar pedicle screw placement. Technical note. J Neurosurg 2003;99 Suppl 3:324-9.  Back to cited text no. 24
    
25.Hubbe U, Kogias E, Vougioukas VI. Image guided percutaneous trans-pedicular screw fixation of the thoracic spine. A clinical evaluation. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2009;151:545-9.  Back to cited text no. 25
[PUBMED]    
26.Schulze CJ, Munzinger E, Weber U. Clinical relevance of accuracy of pedicle screw placement. A computed tomographic-supported analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1998;23:2215-21.  Back to cited text no. 26
    
27.Mirza SK, Wiggins GC, Kuntz CT, York JE, Bellabarba C, Knonodi MA, et al. Accuracy of thoracic vertebral body screw placement using standard fluoroscopy, fluoroscopic image guidance, and computed tomographic image guidance: A cadaver study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2003;28:402-13.  Back to cited text no. 27
    
28.Amiot LP, Lang K, Putzier M, Zippel H, Labelle H. Comparative results between conventional and computer-assisted pedicle screw installation in the thoracic, lumbar, and sacral spine. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2000;25:606-14.  Back to cited text no. 28
    
29.Laine T, Lund T, Ylikoski M, Lohikoski J, Schlenzka D. Accuracy of pedicle screw insertion with and without computer assistance: A randomised controlled clinical study in 100 consecutive patients. Eur Spine J 2000;9:235-40.  Back to cited text no. 29
[PUBMED]    
30.Laine T, Schlenzka D, Makitalo K, Tallroth K, Nolte LP, Visarius H. Improved accuracy of pedicle screw insertion with computer-assisted surgery. A prospective clinical trial of 30 patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1997;22:1254-8.  Back to cited text no. 30
    
31.Liu YJ, Tian W, Liu B, Li Q, Hu L, Li ZY, et al. Accuracy of CT-based navigation of pedicle screws implantation in the cervical spine compared with X-ray fluoroscopy technique. Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi 2005;43:1328-30.  Back to cited text no. 31
[PUBMED]    
32.Ludwig SC, Kowalski JM, Edwards CC 2 nd , Heller JG. Cervical pedicle screws: Comparative accuracy of two insertion techniques. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2000;25:2675-81.  Back to cited text no. 32
    
33.Ludwig SC, Kramer DL, Balderston RA, Vaccaro AR, Foley KF, Albert TJ. Placement of pedicle screws in the human cadaveric cervical spine: Comparative accuracy of three techniques. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2000;25:1655-67.  Back to cited text no. 33
    
34.Merloz P, Tonetti J, Pittet L, Coulomb M, Lavallee S, Sautot P. Pedicle screw placement using image guided techniques. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1998;354:39-48.  Back to cited text no. 34
    
35.Sakai Y, Matsuyama Y, Nakamura H, Katayama Y, Imagama S, Ito Z, et al. Segmental pedicle screwing for idiopathic scoliosis using computer-assisted surgery. J Spinal Disord Tech 2008;21:181-6.  Back to cited text no. 35
    
36.Schnake KJ, Konig B, Berth U, Schroeder RJ, Kandziora F, Stockle U, et al. Accuracy of CT-based navitation of pedicle screws in the thoracic spine compared with conventional technique. Unfallchirurg 2004;107:104-12.  Back to cited text no. 36
    
37.Erkan S, Hsu B, Wu C, Mehbod AA, Perl J, Transfeldt EE. Alignment of pedicle screws with pilot holes: Can tapping improve screw trajectory in thoracic spines? Eur Spine J 2010;19:71-7.  Back to cited text no. 37
[PUBMED]    


    Figures

  [Figure 1]
 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1]


This article has been cited by
1 Treatment of Single-Level Thoracic Tuberculosis by Percutaneous Endoscopic Débridement and Allograft via the Transforaminal Approach Combined with Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Fixation: A Multicenter Study with a Median Follow-Up of 36 Months
Jun-Song Yang,Lei Chu,Rui Deng,Chien-Min Chen,Xiang-Fu Wang,Pei-Gen Xie,Ke-Xiao Yu,Li-Min Rong,Ding-Jun Hao,Jian-Min Wei,Zhong-Liang Deng
World Neurosurgery. 2019; 122: e1472
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
2 Design and Application of Individualized, 3-Dimensional-Printed Navigation Template for Placing Cortical Bone Trajectory Screws in Middle-Upper Thoracic Spine: Cadaver Research Study
Ke Wang,Zeng-Jie Zhang,Jiao-Xiang Chen,Ai-Min Wu,Xiang-Yang Wang,Sun-Ren Sheng
World Neurosurgery. 2019;
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
3 A Novel Groove-Entry Technique for Inserting Thoracic Percutaneous Pedicle Screws
Ken Ishii,Yuta Shiono,Haruki Funao,Kern Singh,Morio Matsumoto
Clinical Spine Surgery. 2017; 30(2): 57
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
4 Facet Joint Violation During Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Placement
Oliver Tannous,Ehsan Jazini,Tristan B. Weir,Kelley E. Banagan,Eugene Y. Koh,D. Greg Anderson,Daniel E. Gelb,Steven C. Ludwig
SPINE. 2017; 42(15): 1189
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
5 Stereotactic Navigation in Complex Spinal Surgery – Tips and Tricks
Brett A. Freedman,Ahmad Nassr,Bradford L. Currier
Operative Techniques in Orthopaedics. 2017;
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
6 Accuracy of pedicle screw insertion in the thoracic and lumbar spine: a comparative study between percutaneous screw insertion and conventional open technique
Hiroko Ikeuchi,Ko Ikuta
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery. 2016;
[Pubmed] | [DOI]



 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
<
Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
Access Statistics
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this article
   Abstract
  Introduction
   Materials and Me...
  Results
  Discussion
   References
   Article Figures
   Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed2305    
    Printed37    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded477    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 6    

Recommend this journal