Insufficient evaluation of S2 alar iliac screw malposition with the intraoperative inlet view: utility of the obturator inlet and iliac oblique views

Shun Okuwaki; Toru Funayama; Yohei Yanagisawa; Takahiro Sunami; Takane Nakagawa; Yosuke Ogata; Kotaro Sakashita; Hisanori Gamada; Kousei Miura; Hiroshi Noguchi; Hiroshi Takahashi; Masao Koda

doi:10.31616/asj.2025.0344

Okuwaki, Funayama, Yanagisawa, Sunami, Nakagawa, Ogata, Sakashita, Gamada, Miura, Noguchi, Takahashi, and Koda: Insufficient evaluation of S2 alar iliac screw malposition with the intraoperative inlet view: utility of the obturator inlet and iliac oblique views

Clinical Study

Asian Spine Journal 2025;asj.2025.0344.

Online first: November 18, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.31616/asj.2025.0344

Insufficient evaluation of S2 alar iliac screw malposition with the intraoperative inlet view: utility of the obturator inlet and iliac oblique views

, Toru Funayama^*

, Masao Koda

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Institute of Medicine, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan

Corresponding author: Shun Okuwaki, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tsukuba, 1-1-1, Tennodai, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, 305-8575, Japan,
Tel: +81-29-853-3900, Fax: +81-29-853-3904, E-mail: shunokuwaki@tsukuba-seikei.jp

^* These authors contributed equally to this work.

Received June 10, 2025 Revised July 16, 2025 Accepted July 20, 2025

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Study Design

Retrospective observational study.

Purpose

To evaluate the effectiveness of the inlet view in detecting anterior deviations of the S2 alar iliac (S2AI) screw during spinopelvic surgery and to assess the utility of the obturator inlet (OI) and iliac oblique (IO) views as alternative imaging methods.

Overview of Literature

S2AI screws are increasingly utilized in spinopelvic fixation due to their biomechanical advantages. However, malpositioning of screws can lead to neurovascular complications. While inlet views in fluoroscopic techniques are generally effective for identifying screw deviations, there are instances where deviations go unnoticed.

Methods

We analyzed data from 101 patients who underwent spinopelvic surgery involving 202 S2AI screws. Postoperative computed tomography (CT) images were reviewed to identify screw deviations. The reconstructed fluoroscopic views from CT, including the inlet, OI, and IO views, were assessed for their effectiveness in detecting deviations. An experimental study using pelvic bone models simulated scenarios where deviations were undetectable in the inlet view but visible in the OI view.

Results

Screw deviations were identified in 12 cases (11.9%) and 13 screws (6.4%), including six screws (3.0%) with anterior deviations and seven screws (3.5%) with posterior deviations. The accurate inlet view detected anterior deviations in three of the five cases analyzed with reconstructed images. However, two cases of anterior deviation were missed due to an insufficient inlet view caused by a 30° caudal tilting angle. In contrast, the OI view successfully identified all cases of both anterior and posterior deviations. In particular, deviations above the arcuate line of the pelvic brim were not detectable in the inlet view.

Conclusions

The inlet view alone is inadequate for detecting anterior deviations, especially those located above the arcuate line of the pelvis. The OI and IO views demonstrated greater effectiveness in identifying deviations, thereby enhancing the accuracy and safety of S2AI screw placement.

Keywords: S2 alar iliac screw; Inlet view; Obturator inlet view; Iliac oblique view; Screw malposition

Introduction

The S2 alar iliac (S2AI) screw [1,2] is commonly used as a caudal anchor during spinal deformity correction surgery due to its biomechanical strength and minimal soft tissue dissection [3,4]. While it provides strong fixation, its optimal insertion path is limited, and malpositioning can lead to severe neurovascular complications. Anterior deviation may damage the internal iliac artery and its pelvic branches, while caudal deviation in the sciatic notch can injure the sciatic nerve and the superior gluteal artery and nerve [5,6]. These complications can be life-threatening or result in reoperation [7].

Visualizing safe insertion corridors with conventional imaging is challenging due to the complex three-dimensional (3D) sacral anatomy and anatomical variations [8]. The fluoroscopic teardrop view indicates the correct S2AI screw trajectory [9,10]; it is an overlapping image of the anterior and posterior pelvic columns, illustrating the corridor from the posterosuperior iliac spine (PSIS) to the anteroinferior iliac spine (AIIS). When the screw is positioned within this teardrop, it can be considered correctly placed; however, there are instances when this view cannot be confirmed due to limitations of the surgical table, the patient’s body size, or the fluoroscopy angle. Additionally, it is unsuitable for real-time insertion [11].

The inlet and outlet views can serve as alternatives or be used in combination with the teardrop view. These views, obtained at approximately 45° of cephalad tilt and 45° of caudad tilt, respectively [12], can detect anterior and caudal deviations, allowing for safe real-time monitoring of screw insertion [4,13,14].

Recently, the obturator inlet (OI) and iliac oblique (IO) views, commonly used in pelvic fracture surgery [11,15], have been proposed as safer options for S2AI screw placement. They enable accurate, real-time assessment of the screw axis and vertical plane relative to the ilium. However, no studies have compared the safety and accuracy of the OI and IO views with those of the inlet and outlet views for S2AI screw insertion. Furthermore, whether deviations, particularly anterior deviations, can be assessed using only the inlet view remains unexamined.

This study aimed to (1) examine the accuracy of S2AI screw insertion using inlet and outlet views; (2) investigate whether postoperative computed tomography (CT) can detect deviations in the inlet view through postoperative CT reconstruction images and whether deviations can be identified in the OI and IO views; and (3) verify whether anterior deviations can be detected in the OI view when they are not visible in the inlet view using model bones.

Materials and Methods

Study 1: retrospective cross-sectional study

This single-center retrospective study analyzed S2AI screw insertion in patients who underwent spinopelvic surgery between April 2015 and December 2023. One hundred and one consecutive patients were enrolled in the study. All patients underwent postoperative CT to evaluate the safety and accuracy of S2AI screw placement. The screw trajectory was assessed on the CT images to determine whether the screw entered the ilium through the sacrum and the sacroiliac (SI) joint. The exclusion criteria included (1) previous pelvic trauma or surgery, (2) primary or metastatic tumors of the pelvis, and (3) lack of CT data.

Demographic data collected included diagnosis, age, sex, body size, and radiographic findings. The presence of transitional vertebrae was investigated preoperatively. We also assessed the sacral slope (SS), defined as the angle between the sacral plate and the horizontal line on preoperative standing, prone, and supine sagittal radiographs.

Informed consent was obtained from all participants with an opt-out option. Ethical approval was obtained from the institutional ethics committee of the University of Tsukuba Hospital (approval number: R06-110).

S2AI screw insertion methods

Following the induction of general anesthesia, the patient was positioned prone on a full carbon bed (Iso KMP plus; Isomedical Systems, Tokyo, Japan) or a surgical table (Maquet Alphamaxx Mobile OR Table; Getinge, Gothenburg, Sweden). Ideal S2AI screws were set on the reconstructed planes at two entry points: the midpoint between the S-1 dorsal foramen and the S-2 dorsal foramen, where it meets the lateral sacral crest, and 1 mm inferior and 1 mm lateral to the S-1 dorsal foramen [17]. The entry point for S2AI should align with the S1 screw entry point [18].

The direction was first confirmed using an anteroposterior view, followed by checks for anterior deviation with the inlet view and caudal deviation with the outlet view. If the teardrop view could be confirmed, a probe was used to create a hole in the bone. When the teardrop view could not be confirmed, only the anteroposterior, inlet, and outlet views were validated. The guidewire was then advanced under fluoroscopic guidance through the appropriate osseous corridor for the S2AI screw, and a cannulated screw was inserted over the guidewire. Typically, cannulated screws with a diameter of 7.5–9.5 mm were used.

Evaluation of screw deviation

Screw protrusion of ≥6 mm was defined as a deviation in the postoperative CT images [19,20]. The protrusion distance was measured as the shortest distance from the furthest end of the penetrating screw to the adjacent cortical bone. All CT images were obtained immediately postoperatively using the same multidetector row CT scanner, with a thickness of 1.25 mm from the L1 level to the distal femoral trochanter. The number of cases with deviation and the corresponding patient backgrounds were analyzed.

Study 2: image-based observational study

Study 2-1: using the inlet view to detect cases of anterior deviation

Cases of deviation identified in Study 1 were analyzed using 3D reconstruction software (Synapse Vincent; Fujifilm Medical, Tokyo, Japan) on postoperative CT images. The 3D CT images were converted into synthetic radiographic views.

The inclination angle of the sacral slope relative to the vertical direction of the prone radiograph was defined as the prone SS (Fig. 1A). The preoperative prone SS angle served as an indicator of pelvic tilt, and 3D fluoroscopic images were reconstructed to create an indicator of the tilt angle required for fluoroscopy. In cases where a prone radiograph was taken before surgery, the SS was measured in the prone position. In cases without a preoperative prone radiograph, the prone position SS immediately after surgery was used as a reference.

During image reconstruction, the SS of the postoperative supine CT was calibrated with the preoperative prone SS, which represents the virtual angle of 0° of frontal fluoroscopy in the intraoperative prone position (Fig. 1B, C). The standard was established at the rotation angle where the S1 spinous process is centered on the sacrum.

The inlet view was defined as a tilting caudal view in which the anterior cortex of the S1 body overlaps with the anterior cortex of the S2 body [21,22].

We measured the required inclination angle and assessed whether deviation could be evaluated using the inlet view in CT-reconstructed images when deviation was present.

Study 2-2: teardrop view in cases of deviation

A “teardrop sign” must be visible to confirm the radiographic view. The outer edges of the “teardrop sign” are formed by the cortical layers of the iliac bone. The teardrop view indicates the direction of screw insertion, which should be placed directly in the center of the teardrop sign [9,10]. We measured the required inclination angle for the teardrop view in CT-reconstructed images in cases of deviation.

Study 2-3: detection of deviation in the OI and IO view

The OI view provides a tangential perspective of both the inner and outer cortices of the ilium at the PSIS–AIIS corridor, enabling visualization of the SI joint and guiding mediolateral screw trajectories. An accurate inlet view should be obtained from the frontal pelvic view to create the OI view. This view is then rotated to generate an axial view of the pelvis on the side being observed. An accurate OI view is characterized by the overlapping outer plates of the ilium [11].

The IO view offers an en face view of the instrumented iliac wing, highlighting the sciatic notch, hip joint, and AIIS. The IO view guides craniocaudal screw placement, which should not aim cranially beyond the superior AIIS. To achieve an optimal IO view, it should be rotated toward the instrumented hemipelvis until the sciatic notch is visible. The AIIS is clearly outlined in the OI view, ensuring that the screw is directed between the proximal and distal AIIS [11]. We measured the required inclination angle for each case and evaluated whether deviation could be assessed using OI and IO views in CT-reconstructed images in cases with deviation.

Study 3: experimental replication using model bones

Male pelvic training models (Full Male Pelvis #1301; Sawbones, Vashon, WA, USA) were utilized. A full carbon bed (Iso KMP Plus; Isomedical Systems, Tokyo, Japan) and the S2AI screw, measuring 90 mm in length and 8.5 mm in diameter with partially threaded cannulation (CREO; Globus Medical, Audubon, PA, USA), were employed. We replicated the screw pathway that could not be assessed in the inlet view but could be evaluated in the OI view.

Statistical analysis

Data are presented as the mean±standard deviation. The Mann-Whitney U test was applied for continuous variables, while the chi-square test was used for categorical variables. Statistical significance was set at p<0.05. All statistical analyses were conducted using GraphPad Prism 10 software (GraphPad Software Inc., La Jolla, CA, USA).

Results

Study 1: retrospective cross-sectional study

This study included 101 patients with 202 S2AI screws (72 females and 29 males), with a mean age of 70.4±8.5 years (range, 46–85 years). The cohort comprised 48 cases of degenerative scoliosis, 20 cases of kyphosis following osteoporotic vertebral fractures, eight cases of revision after lumbar surgery, eight cases of pyogenic spondylitis, and six cases of lumbar spinal stenosis (Table 1).

S2AI screw deviation was noted in 12 cases (11.9%) and involved 13 screws (6.4%), with five cases (5.0%) and six screws (3.0%) displaying anterior deviation, and seven cases (6.9%) and seven screws (3.5%) exhibiting posterior deviation.

No significant differences in age, sex, height, or body weight were observed between the groups. SS was greater in the following order: standing, prone, and spinal positions; however, there were no significant differences between the groups. The transitional vertebrae were also assessed for lumbarization and sacralization, with no significant differences found between the groups (Table 1). In cases of deviation, no neurological deficits or visceral or vascular complications were associated with S2AI screw placement.

Study 2: image-based observational study

Study 2-1: using the inlet view to detect cases of anterior deviation

Of the 12 cases and 13 screws with deviations listed in Table 2, we evaluated five cases and six screws exhibiting anterior deviations. Two cases of anterior deviation involved transitional vertebrae showing lumbarization (40.0%). In the other three cases and four screws, anterior deviation was noted in the inlet view for one case. In two cases and two screws, deviation could not be identified in the inlet view (Fig. 2). In all seven cases of posterior deviation, the deviation was undetectable in the inlet view.

For the five cases of anterior deviation, the average inclination angle required for an accurate inlet view, in reference to the supine SS, was 41.7° (range, 27.8°–54.3°). Of the three cases where the accurate inlet view detected anterior deviation, the deviation was difficult to identify in two cases due to an insufficient inlet view angle of 30° (Fig. 3).

Study 2-2: teardrop view in cases of deviation

In the 12 cases and 13 screws with deviation, the average inclination required for the teardrop view was 13.2°±7.5° (range, 3.1°–27.0°) on the cranial side and 31.5°±4.8° (range, 25.0°–39.3°) for rotation, with maximum values of 27° on the cranial side and 39.3° for rotation (Table 2, Fig. 4). Deviations were detected in all cases.

Study 2-3: detection of deviations in the OI and IO view

The average tilt necessary for the OI view was 23.4°±7.4° caudally (range, 12.1°–33.7°), and 25.1°±6.2° of rotation (range, 14.0°–39.4°), with maximum values of 33.7° caudally and 39.4° of rotation. In all 12 cases of deviation, both anterior and posterior deviations were detected by the OI view. Notably, the OI view was able to identify anterior deviation in two cases where the inlet view did not. A representative case is shown in Fig. 5. The average rotation angle required for the IO view was 36.2°±10.2° (range, 13.0°–59.0°). The IO view successfully detected caudal deviation in all cases with deviation.

Study 3: experimental replication using model bones

In Study 2, we identified two cases of anterior deviation that could not be evaluated using the inlet view but were assessable through the OI view, along with two additional cases that could be evaluated using the OI view. These four cases exhibited anterior displacement above the arcuate line of the pelvic brim, originating from the sacral alar region. Consequently, we reproduced the same level of deviation using a model bone.

We utilized an 8.5×90 mm screw to achieve deviation of the SI joint above the arcuate line in all four cases. The deviation was assessed using fluoroscopy, with the fluoroscope tilted 45° caudally relative to the SS angle of 30° in the prone position. While the accurate inlet view did not allow for the evaluation of anterior deviation, the OI view revealed that the screw was indeed anteriorly deviated (Fig. 6).

Discussion

Previous studies have reported S2AI screw deviation rates of 1.5%–2.7% using O-arm navigation [23,24], 3.7% with 3D-printed guides [25], and 5.1%–15% with fluoroscopy alone [27,28]. In the present study, we found a deviation rate of 6.4% using fluoroscopy alone, which was confirmed in the frontal, inlet, and outlet views, as well as in the teardrop view, where possible. To date, no clinical study has accurately reported the incidence of neurovascular injuries resulting from S2AI screw malpositioning, with only one case of L5 nerve root injury documented in the literature [7]. Although anterior deviations are theoretically associated with the risk of injury to the internal iliac vessels or pelvic nerves, no such complications were observed in our study. Careful fluoroscopic evaluation is essential to prevent potentially serious complications.

The inlet view is crucial for assessing pelvic morphology, with a recommended caudal tilt angle of 23°–33° in the general population [22,28]. In this study, the average required tilt angle was 41.7°, surpassing the tilt angle reported in previous studies. This discrepancy may be attributed to the inclusion of patients with spinal deformities and posterior pelvic tilt, unlike previous studies that focused on healthy individuals [29,30]. Additionally, the prone SS is smaller than the supine SS, which further increases the required tilt angle.

The inlet view is commonly used to assess pelvic morphology and guide S2AI screw placement, particularly for detecting pelvic cavity protrusion [22,28]. In this study, the inlet view identified anterior deviation in five cases but failed in two, missing two additional cases of anterior deviation due to an insufficient tilt angle. This suggests that the inlet view is inadequate for evaluating anterior deviation, highlighting the need to revise current evaluation methods for S2AI screw placement.

Although anterior deviation can sometimes be detected in the inlet view, it may be overlooked when the deviation lies above the pelvic arcuate line, which serves as an anatomical boundary separating the lesser and greater pelvis with a variable slope (pelvic brim). Since the inlet view is observed from the caudal side, deviations above the arcuate line may cause the screw to appear intraosseous due to the slope difference. With the correct insertion points of the S2AI screw, a deviation to this superior position may occur if the angulation to the caudal side is too small.

S2AI screws may deviate from the sacral alar by skiving against the hard cortex of the SI joint [23]. One contributing factor is an insufficient caudal insertion angle. While a caudal tilt of 20°–29° is generally recommended [18], this angle must be increased when the SS in the prone position is large. An inadequate caudal angle for screw insertion raises the risk of anterior deviation above the arcuate line. In this series, the average prone SS was 27° (range, 21°–30°) across four cases, exceeding the overall average of 21° and indicating an insufficient tilt angle of the screw to the caudal side. Evaluating anterior deviation in the inlet view was challenging due to the larger-than-average angle detected in these cases.

Another contributing factor is the presence of a transitional vertebra. In cases where S1 becomes lumbarized, determining the entry point of the S2AI screw using the foramen as a landmark becomes difficult. If the entry point is more cranial than usual, the deviation will be superior, increasing the likelihood of deviation above the arcuate line (Figs. 5D, 6C–E). Compared to the 10 cases (9.9%) where S1 was lumbarized, anterior deviation was more frequent in these instances, further contributing to deviations above the arcuate line.

This study had several limitations. First, the number of cases in which the teardrop view could be evaluated was not recorded, preventing an estimation of the deviation rate based solely on the inlet view. Nonetheless, this is the first study to report that the inlet view is inadequate for assessing anterior deviation, and surgeons should be made aware of this issue. Second, it was not possible to verify findings through actual operations, and the impact of body size and subcutaneous fat thickness could not be assessed. Third, due to the small sample size, we could not determine whether all anterior and posterior deviations could be evaluated using the OI view. Additionally, it is important to note that the OI view is not a perfect tool; it cannot detect inferior deviations due to its inherent limitations. Therefore, it is essential to confirm screw evaluation using two or more axial views, as inferior deviations can be identified using the IO view.

Conclusions

The inlet view was an inadequate imaging method for evaluating the anterior deviation of S2AI screws. All cases in this series were assessed using the OI view. Specifically, the inlet view was unsuitable for evaluating screws that deviated above the arcuate line of the pelvic brim. When assessing S2AI screws using fluoroscopy alone, both the OI and IO views proved useful for evaluating deviations.

Key Points

This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the inlet view in detecting S2 alar iliac (S2AI) screw anterior deviations during spinopelvic surgery and assess the utility of the obturator inlet (OI) and iliac oblique (IO) views as alternative imaging methods.
Our findings indicate that the inlet view alone is insufficient for detecting anterior deviations.
The OI and IO views effectively detect deviations and could improve the accuracy and safety of S2AI screw placement.

Notes

Conflict of Interest

No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.

Acknowledgments

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, S.O., upon reasonable request.

Author Contributions

Conception or design: SO, TF, YY. Data curation: SO, TF, YY, TS. Formal analysis: SO. Investigation: SO, TF, YY, TS, TN, YO, KS, HG, KM, HN, HT, MK. Methodology: SO, TF, YY. Supervision: TF, YY, TS, TN, YO, KS, HG, KM, HN, HT, MK. Writing–original draft: SO, TF, YY, TS. Final approval: SO, TF, YY, TS, TN, YO, KS, HG, KM, HN, HT, MK. Agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work: SO, TF, YY, TS, TN, YO, KS, HG, KM, HN, HT, MK.

Fig. 1

Reconstruction for computed tomography (CT). (A, B) When reconstructing the postoperative CT (sacral slope [SS]=36°), the pelvic tilt is reproduced by correcting the cranial–caudal tilt using sacral tilt (SS=27°) obtained from the preoperative or interoperative supine X-ray as an indicator and setting the zero position. (C) A three-dimensional image on an imaginary fluoroscopic frontal view.

Fig. 2

Anterior deviation cases. An accurate inlet view reconstructed from computed tomography images in five cases with anterior deviation. The caudal tilting angle of each case is shown. (A–C) Anterior deviation can be detected (arrow). (D, E) Anterior deviation cannot be detected (arrow dotted line).

Fig. 3

Impact of insufficient inlet view angulation. In three cases where proper inlet views demonstrated anterior deviation (A–C), inadequate inlet views with insufficient caudal angulation of 30° failed to detect the same anterior deviation in two cases (A, B). Dotted arrows indicate missed displacement).

Fig. 4

Teardrop view on postoperative computed tomography (CT) reconstruction. Postoperative CT-reconstructed teardrop views demonstrated deviation in all cases (arrows indicate areas of displacement).

Fig. 5

Representative case with anterior deviation. (A) Inlet view on computed tomography (CT) image reconstruction, showing the angle of overlap between S1 and S2 anterior walls (arrowhead). Anterior deviation of the right S2 alar iliac (S2AI) screw is not detected (arrow). (B) Obturator inlet view on CT reconstruction. The inlet view was rotated to the angle of overlap of the iliac outer cortex (arrowhead). Anterior deviation of the right S2AI screw can be detected (arrow). (C) Iliac oblique view on CT reconstruction. The right S2AI screw was evaluated without caudal deviation. (D) Three-dimensional CT image. The right S2AI screw deviated anteriorly from the sacroiliac joint (arrow).

Fig. 6

Anterior deviation cases in model bone. (A) The accurate inlet view did not allow the anterior deviation to be evaluated (arrow dotted line). (B) The screw deviates anteriorly (arrow) when rotated from the obturator inlet view. (C) View of the pelvic cavity from 30° at the cranial side, (D) Frontal pelvic view, (E) View from 30° at the caudal side.

Table 1

Patient demographic data

Characteristic	Total (n=101)	S2AI screw inserted correctly (n=89)	Malposition S2AI screw (n=12)	p-value
Age (yr)	70.4±8.5	70.6±8.1	69.3±11.5	0.61
Height (cm)	152.0±8.3	152.4±8.4	148.4±6.0	0.13
Body weight (kg)	53.9±12.9	54.2±12.8	50.9±14.5	0.43
Sex, female (%)	72 (71.3)	61 (68.5)	11 (91.7)	0.17
Diagnosis
Degenerative scoliosis	54	43	11
Kyphosis after OVF	20	20	0
Revision after lumbar surgery	8	7	1
Pyogenic spondylitis	8	8	0
Lumbar spinal stenosis	6	6	0
Spinal metastasis	2	2	0
Pseudoarthrosis after OVF	2	2	0
Dialysis-associated spondylosis	1	1	0
Comorbidity
Parkinson disease	12	11	1
Rheumatoid arthritis	9	9	0
Systemic lupus erythematosus	5	4	1
Malignant tumor	3	3	0
Ankylosing spondylitis	3	3	0
Dialysis	2	2	0
Primary aldosteronism	1	1	0
Transitional vertebra	12 (11.9)	10 (11.2)	2 (16.7)	0.63
Lumbarization	10 (9.9)	8 (9.0)	2 (16.7)	0.34
Sacralization	2 (2.0)	2 (2.2)	0 (0.0)	1.0
SS (°)
Standing-SS	16.3±9.3	16.7±9.3	13.4±9.2	0.27
Prone-SS	21.1±7.4	21.1±7.5	21.6±7.0	0.83
Supine-SS	25.2±8.9	25.3±9.2	24.9±7.3	0.90

Values are presented as mean±standard deviation, number (%), or number, unless otherwise stated.

S2AI, S2 alar iliac screw; OVF, osteoporotic vertebral fracture; SS, sacral slope.

Table 2

Deviation patients’ demographic data

Case	Diagnosis	Age (yr), sex	Height (cm)	BW (kg)	Prone SS (°)	Transitional vertebra	Caudal angle of inlet view (°)	Detectable in inlet/insufficient inlet view (°)	Teardrop view/cranial angle (°)	Teardrop view/rotation (°)
Anterior deviations
1	Degenerative scoliosis	83, F	160	45	30	Lumbarization	27.8	No/no	16.6	26.0
2	Degenerative scoliosis	70, F	150	37	30	None	31.8	No/no	27.0	37.5
3	Degenerative scoliosis	75, F	147	45	27	None	40.3	Yes/no	21.2	29.7
4	Degenerative scoliosis	63, F	146	34	21	Lumbarization	41.2	Yes/no	7.4	26.0
5. Rt.	Degenerative scoliosis	67, F	156	63	15	None	54.3	Yes/yes	5.0	25.7
5. Lt.								Yes/yes	7.7	25.0
Posterior deviations
6	Degenerative scoliosis	64, F	143	38	28	None	30.6	No/no	17.4	39.3
7	Degenerative scoliosis	77, F	149	64	30	None	34.9	No/no	25.1	28.2
8	Degenerative scoliosis	46, F	146	73	19	None	38.7	No/no	3.1	32.4
9	Revision after lumbar surgery	78, M	151	43	16	None	40.0	No/no	7.3	35.5
10	Degenerative scoliosis	71, F	148	40	12	None	42.0	No/no	11.1	35.3
11	Degenerative scoliosis	84, F	138	51	16	None	47.4	No/no	7.4	36.4
12	Degenerative scoliosis	53, F	145	72	15	None	52.8	No/no	15.8	31.9

BW, body weight; SS, sacral slope; F, female; M, male; Rt, right; Lt, left.

References

1. Sponseller PD, Zimmerman RM, Ko PS, et al. Low profile pelvic fixation with the sacral alar iliac technique in the pediatric population improves results at two-year minimum follow-up. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2010;35:1887–92.

2. Kebaish KM. Sacropelvic fixation: techniques and complications. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2010;35:2245–51.

3. Hoernschemeyer DG, Pashuck TD, Pfeiffer FM. Analysis of the s2 alar-iliac screw as compared with the traditional iliac screw: does it increase stability with sacroiliac fixation of the spine? Spine J 2017;17:875–9.

4. Matteini LE, Kebaish KM, Volk WR, et al. An S-2 alar iliac pelvic fixation: technical note. Neurosurg Focus 2010;28:E13.

5. Abdul-Jabbar A, Yilmaz E, Iwanaga J, et al. Neurovascular relationships of S2AI screw placement: anatomic study. World Neurosurg 2018;116:e108–12.

6. Arora A, Berven S. Challenges and complications in freehand S2-alar-iliac spinopelvic fixation and the potential for robotics to enhance patient safety. Global Spine J 2022;12:45S–52S.

7. Funayama T, Yanagisawa Y, Ogata Y, Okuwaki S, Tatsumura M. A misplaced S2 alar-iliac screw causing L5 spinal nerve injury: a report of a rare case. Cureus 2024;16:e73638.

8. Kim YJ, Bridwell KH, Lenke LG, Rhim S, Cheh G. Pseudarthrosis in long adult spinal deformity instrumentation and fusion to the sacrum: prevalence and risk factor analysis of 144 cases. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2006;31:2329–36.

9. Nowak S, Muller J, Weidemeier ME, Schroeder HW, Muller JU. Tear-drop technique in iliac screw placement: a technical analysis. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2021;163:1577–81.

10. Fang T, Russo GS, Schroeder GD, Kepler CK. The accurate free-hand placement of S2 alar iliac (S2AI) screw. Clin Spine Surg 2020;33:102–3.

11. El Naga AN, Gendelberg D. Obturator inlet and iliac oblique technique for safe, convenient, and reliable iliac screw placement. N Am Spine Soc J 2024;17:100298.

12. Mostafavi HR, Tornetta P. Radiologic evaluation of the pelvis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1996;(329):6–14.

13. Baskin KM, Cahill AM, Kaye RD, et al. Closed reduction with CT-guided screw fixation for unstable sacroiliac joint fracture-dislocation. Pediatr Radiol 2004;34:963–9.

14. Yamada K, Abe Y, Satoh S. Safe insertion of S-2 alar iliac screws: radiological comparison between 2 insertion points using computed tomography and 3D analysis software. J Neurosurg Spine 2018;28:536–42.

15. Jain A, Brooks JT, Kebaish KM, Sponseller PD. Sacral alar iliac fixation for spine deformity. JBJS Essent Surg Tech 2016;6:e10.

16. Mattei TA, Fassett DR. Combined S-1 and S-2 sacral alar-iliac screws as a salvage technique for pelvic fixation after pseudarthrosis and lumbosacropelvic instability: technical note. J Neurosurg Spine 2013;19:321–30.

17. Nottmeier EW, Pirris SM, Balseiro S, Fenton D. Three-dimensional image-guided placement of S2 alar screws to adjunct or salvage lumbosacral fixation. Spine J 2010;10:595–601.

18. Zhu F, Bao HD, Yuan S, et al. Posterior second sacral alar iliac screw insertion: anatomic study in a Chinese population. Eur Spine J 2013;22:1683–9.

19. Gertzbein SD, Robbins SE. Accuracy of pedicular screw placement in vivo. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1990;15:11–4.

20. Oh CH, Yoon SH, Kim YJ, Hyun D, Park HC. Technical report of free hand pedicle screw placement using the entry points with junction of proximal edge of transverse process and lamina in lumbar spine: analysis of 2601 consecutive screws. Korean J Spine 2013;10:7–13.

21. Barger K, Robinson M. An evaluation of the inlet obturator oblique view for sacroiliac and transsacral screw placement. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2023;143:1869–75.

22. Karkhur Y, Tiwari A, Maini L, Bansal V, Kakralia A. Radiological evaluation of pelvic inlet and outlet radiographic view in Indian population. J Clin Orthop Trauma 2018;9:334–7.

23. Tamaki R, Wada K, Okazaki K. Surgical technique and accuracy of S2 alar-iliac screw insertion using intraoperative O-arm navigation: an analysis of 120 screws. World Neurosurg 2020;144:e326–30.

24. Ray WZ, Ravindra VM, Schmidt MH, Dailey AT. Stereotactic navigation with the O-arm for placement of S-2 alar iliac screws in pelvic lumbar fixation. J Neurosurg Spine 2013;18:490–5.

25. Zhao Y, Luo H, Ma Y, et al. Accuracy of S2 alar-iliac screw placement under the guidance of a 3D-printed surgical guide template. World Neurosurg 2021;146:e161–7.

26. Shillingford JN, Laratta JL, Park PJ, et al. Human versus robot: a propensity-matched analysis of the accuracy of free hand versus robotic guidance for placement of S2 alar-iliac (S2AI) screws. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2018;43:E1297–304.

27. Shillingford JN, Laratta JL, Tan LA, et al. The free-hand technique for S2-alar-iliac screw placement: a safe and effective method for sacropelvic fixation in adult spinal deformity. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2018;100:334–42.

28. Melkamu S, Alemayehu G, Hailu S. Radiographic assessment of pelvic inlet and outlet view angles in the Ethiopian population. JB JS Open Access 2024;9:e24.00015..

29. Ziran BH, Wasan AD, Marks DM, Olson SA, Chapman MW. Fluoroscopic imaging guides of the posterior pelvis pertaining to iliosacral screw placement. J Trauma 2007;62:347–56.

30. Handa VL, Lockhart ME, Fielding JR, et al. Racial differences in pelvic anatomy by magnetic resonance imaging. Obstet Gynecol 2008;111:914–20.