The superiority of the arch root screw technique in terms of biomechanics of spinal tricolumnar fixation has led to its widespread use in spinal surgery. However, conventional open pedicle fixation fusion surgery requires extensive stripping and prolonged pulling of the paravertebral muscles, which often leads to denervation and atrophy of the paravertebral muscles and causes the development of spinal fusion disease. kawaguchi et al. analyzed the effect of intraoperative pulling hook blade pressure and pulling time on the paravertebral muscles and found that muscle injury-related phosphocreatinine kinase levels were proportional to the intensity of pulling hook pulling pressure and gejo et al. compared postoperative mri and low back muscle strength in 80 patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery and confirmed that damage to lumbar spine musculature was significantly correlated with the duration of intraoperative pulling, and that the incidence of low back pain was higher in patients with prolonged muscle pulling. In contrast, rantanen et al. found that the postoperative functional recovery status of lumbar spine patients was significantly correlated with the pathological changes in their paravertebral muscles. In recent years, with the progress of modern medical science and technology, while striving for the safety and accuracy of pedicle screw implantation, people have explored the use of minimally invasive means of percutaneous pedicle screw implantation, thus effectively reducing man-made injuries. 1982, magerl first reported the technique of percutaneous pedicle nail system fixation, mainly used for the treatment of spinal trauma, the nail attachment device is located outside the skin, which is an external fixation device. In 1995, mathews buried the percutaneous pedicle nail and the connecting rod in the subcutaneous fascia under direct vision, which reduced the risk of infection, but there was a high incidence of bone discontinuity, which may be related to the excessive length of the force arm. Also, the fixation device is located subcutaneously and is uncomfortable for the patient. In 2001, kevin t. foley of the Texas State University Neurosurgery Research Center reported in that year’s neurosurgery on a minimally invasive fixation system for lumbar spondylolisthesis with anterior lumbar interbody fusion followed by posterior percutaneous pedicle screw implantation several weeks later, with visualization of the pedicle screw implantation device as well as the fixation device that was later adopted and manufactured by Orthopedic Devices, Inc. The visualized pedicle screw placement device and fixation device were later adopted and manufactured by orthopedic instrumentation companies as the Minimally Invasive Spine System. It is also the most commonly used percutaneous pedicle screw internal fixation system today. With the combination of percutaneous pedicle screw technology with computer-assisted technology and endoscopic technology, it began to be used more often in the surgical diagnosis and treatment of lumbar spondylolisthesis, spinal fractures, chronic lower back pain, and spinal tumors, and because the percutaneous pedicle screw technology has avoided the disadvantages of traditional posterior spinal internal fixation implantation surgery, such as large incisions, muscle stripping, and slow postoperative recovery, it has gradually become It has gradually become one of the basic technical means of minimally invasive spinal surgery.