RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to investigate the incidence and risk factors for sacral fractures following lumbosacral fusion. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of patients who underwent lumbosacral fusion for degenerative spinal stenosis with a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Patients who developed and those who did not develop a sacral fracture were categorized into the "sacral fracture" and "non-fracture" groups. The demographic and radiological data were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: A total of 65 patients were included in this study. Among them, seven patients were categorized into the sacral fracture and 58 patients into the non-fracture groups, respectively. The incidence of sacral fracture was 10.8%. In the sacral fracture group, age and fusion levels were significantly higher (P < 0.05), while bone mineral density (BMD) T-score was significantly lower (P < 0.05) than non-fracture group. PI, preoperative PT, postoperative SS, and postoperative LL were significantly higher (P < 0.05) in the sacral fracture than the non-fracture group. Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that BMD T-score (Odds ratio [OR] 0.25, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.08-0.79, P = 0.019), postoperative SS (OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.00-1.29, P = 0.047), and changes in L4-S1 lordosis (OR 1.11, 95% CI 1.00-1.23, P = 0.049) were significant factors. CONCLUSIONS: The overall incidence of sacral fracture was 10.8%. In our study, advanced age, low BMD, long fusion levels, and preoperative compensatory pelvic retroversion and excessive correction of it were risk factors for sacral fractures.

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Degenerative sacroiliac (SI) joint syndrome is known to be more common after lumbosacral fusion. While this diagnosis is suspected based on various clinical criteria and diagnostic tests, it is confirmed with a diagnostic nerve block. If conservative treatment fails, SI joint fusion through a minimally invasive approach is a useful palliative approach for patients at a treatment crossroads. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical and functional results at 2years postoperative after minimally invasive SI joint fusion in patients with SI joint syndrome following lumbosacral fusion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We carried out a single-center retrospective study of patients operated between June 2017 and October 2020. Included were patients who had a confirmed diagnosis of SI joint syndrome after lumbosacral fusion surgery, who underwent SI joint fusion and had at least 2years' follow-up. The primary outcome was the improvement in lumbar and radicular pain on a numerical rating scale (NRS). The secondary outcomes were the functional scores (Oswestry and SF-12) along with the level of patient satisfaction. Our study population consisted of 54 patients (41 women, 13 men) with a mean age of 59years (27-88). Thirty-one of these patients were operated on both sides (85 fusions in all). The patients had undergone a mean of 3 lumbar surgeries (1-7) before the SI fusion. RESULTS: The lumbar and radicular NRS were 8.4 (7-10) and 5.1 (2-10) preoperatively and 5.2 (0-8) and 3.0 (0-8) at 2years postoperatively, which was a reduction of 37% and 42% (p<0.001), respectively. The Oswestry score went from 69.4 (52-86) preoperatively to 45.6 (29-70) at 2years, which was a 33% improvement (p<0.001). Eighty-six percent of patients were satisfied or very satisfied with the surgery. DISCUSSION: After minimally invasive SI joint fusion, the patients in this study had clear clinical and functional improvements. Previous publications analyzing the results of SI joint fusion found even more improvement, but those patients were relatively heterogenous; in our study, only patients who had a history of lumbosacral fusion were included. CONCLUSION: Minimally invasive SI joint fusion helped patients who developed SI joint syndrome after lumbosacral fusion to improve clinically and functionally. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV, retrospective study.

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To investigate S2 alar screw (S2AS) accuracy and factors associated with S2AS loosening and lumbosacral nonunion. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent lumbosacral fusion surgery with S2AS addition under fluoroscopy. S2AS loosening and lumbosacral nonunion were analyzed using a 1-year postoperative computed tomography. S2AS insertion accuracy was originally classified as accurate, short, anterior perforation, lateral perforation, and sacroiliac joint (SIJ) deviation among lateral perforation. Clinical data including sex, age, body mass index, fused segments, fusion procedure, primary or revision surgery, Japanese Orthopedic Association scores and complications were collected. Factors associated with S2AS loosening and lumbosacral nonunion were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 37 patients (74 screws, age: 63.78 ± 13.57 years, female/male: 14/23 patients, body mass index: 23.11 ± 2.53, fused segments: 1-4 levels, revision: 38%) were included. S2AS loosening and lumbosacral nonunion were observed in 18 screws (13%) and 8 patients (22%) respectively. Only 35 screws (47%) were inserted accurately in our classification. Short, lateral perforation, and anterior perforation were observed in 14 screws (19%), 22 screws (30%), and 3 screws (4.1%). SIJ deviation was seen in 15 screws (20%) Factors associated with S2AS loosening were older age (P = 0.038), fusion levels (P = 0.011), and SIJ deviation (P < 0.001). S2AS loosening affects S1 pedicle screw (S1PS) loosening (P = 0.001). Furthermore, S2AS loosening is a risk factor for lumbosacral nonunion (P = 0.046). CONCLUSIONS: S2AS insertion under fluoroscopy is inaccurate. S2AS loosening induces S1PS loosening and lumbosacral nonunion. Surgeons should avoid deviating to SIJ, especially in older patients and relatively longer fusion.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Background: The study aim was to present four new well-documented cases of spontaneous improvement of olisthetic scoliosis and to analyze well-documented cases from the literature. Methods: Surgical log search and systematic review were conducted. Inclusion criteria were (1) age less than 18 years, (2) symptomatic high-grade (≥50%) spondylolisthesis, (3) scoliosis ≥20o, (4) primary surgical treatment via lumbosacral fusion, (5) complete x-rays, and (6) minimum 1-year radiographic follow-up or until curve resolution. Results: A total of 13 patients with average age of 13.9 years were included in the study, 4 from the authors' surgical logs and 9 from the literature. Slip percentage of L5-S1 ranged from 51% to 95%. Olisthetic curve magnitude averaged 34.6° (range: 20°-45°) with majority (8/13) demonstrating long thoracic curves with lateral trunk shift. All but one of these were apex right with rightward trunk shift. The remainder of the curves were isolated lumbar curves, with an apex left morphology without trunk shift. Eleven of the 13 patients showed curve improvement following isolated lumbosacral fusion. Three patients experienced a decrease in curve magnitude of 12°-28° and eight patients enjoyed complete resolution (≤10°) of their scoliosis. Conclusion: The current study summarizes 13 well-documented cases of olisthetic scoliosis (4 new cases and 9 from the literature) that associated with symptomatic high-grade spondylolisthesis. All were treated via a primary posterior lumbosacral fusion strategy. Eleven of the 13 curves showed spontaneous improvement (8 complete resolution of scoliosis) following their lumbosacral surgery. Level of evidence: Therapeutic level IV.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Lumbar/lumbosacral fusion supplemented with topping-off devices has been proposed with the aim of avoiding adjacent segment degeneration proximal to the fusion construct. However, it remains unclear how the biomechanics of the sacroiliac joint (SIJ) are altered after topping-off surgery. The objective of this study was to investigate the biomechanical effects of topping-off instrumentation on SIJ after lumbosacral fusion. METHODS: The validated finite element model of an intact lumbar spine-pelvis segment was modified to simulate L5-S1 interbody fusion fixed with a pedicle screw system. An interspinous spacer, Device for Intervertebral Assisted Motion (DIAM), was used as a topping-off device and placed between interspinous processes of the L4 and L5 segments. Range of motion (ROM), von-Mises stress distribution, and ligament strain at SIJ were compared between fusion (without DIAM) and topping-off (fusion with DIAM) models under moments of four physiological motions. RESULTS: ROM at the left and right SIJs in the topping-off model was higher by 26.9% and 27.5% in flexion, 16.8% and 16.1% in extension, 18.8% and 15.8% in lateral bending, and 3.7% and 7.4% in axial rotation, respectively, compared to those in the fusion model. The predicted stress and strain data showed that under all physiological loads, the topping-off model exhibited higher stress and ligament strain at the SIJs than the fusion model. CONCLUSIONS: Motion, stress, and ligament strain at SIJ increase when supplementing lumbosacral fusion with topping-off devices, suggesting that topping-off surgery may be associated with higher risks of SIJ degeneration and pain than fusion alone.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: There may be biomechanical changes in the adjacent hip joint after lumbosacral fusion. The literature has limited information on how these biomechanical changes may result in hip joint space. MATERIAL: METHOD: Our retrospective study examined hip joint space narrowing in patients who underwent lumbosacral fusion between 2020 and 2022. In addition, spinopelvic parameters such as sacral slope, the sagittal vertical axis, pelvic incidence, lumbar lordosis, and pelvic tilt were compared in patients who underwent short-segment (up to three levels, S group) and long-segment (4 and higher levels, L group) fusions. RESULTS: Our study found no significant relationship between spinopelvic parameters and joint space narrowing in the S and L groups. In addition, it was determined that there was more narrowing in the hip joint space in the long-segment group, and there was a positive correlation between the segment length and the narrowing in the hip joint space. CONCLUSION: After lumbosacral fusion, narrowing of the hip joint space was observed. Particularly patients with long-segment lumbosacral fusion should be followed closely regarding hip osteoarthritis risk.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

We investigated whether computed tomography (CT) Hounsfield unit (HU) values of the S1 screw trajectory can predict screw loosening after lumbosacral fixation. We analysed 102 patients (58 men and 44 women) who underwent L5-S1 interbody fusion between April 2018 and October 2019. We reviewed the characteristics of patients including body mass index, smoking, comorbidity with diabetes mellitus, and interbody fusion types. Bone mineral density (BMD) was obtained from the lumbar spine and total hip using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. Additionally, we reviewed the S1 screw lengths and diameters. HU values of both L1 vertebral bodies and bilateral S1 screw trajectories were measured on preoperative CT. At six months postoperatively, S1 screws on CT were assessed. Screws with a 1 mm or more radiolucent zone were defined as "loosening". Seventeen patients had loosened screws, and 85 patients did not. The patient characteristics did not significantly differ between the two groups. Both total hip BMD and L1 HU values were low in the loosening patient group (both p = 0.03). Of the 204 total S1 screws, 25 screws were loosened, and 179 screws were not. The screw length was short (p = 0.01), and the HU value of the S1 screw trajectory was low (p < 0.001) in the loosening screw group. Based on receiver operating characteristic analyses of these factors, the area under the curve of HU value of the S1 screw trajectory was the highest (0.79). Measuring the HU value of both the L1 vertebral body and S1 screw trajectory aids in predicting screw loosening.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Spinal fusion is a surgical procedure that has been successfully conducted for many years. It is applied for various indications, such as degeneration, deformity, instability, spinal stenosis, trauma, tumor, and infection. This study aims to determine the effects of this procedure on daily life and sleep quality by examining postoperative symptoms and refractory complaints of patients who underwent lumbosacral fusion for various indications. METHODS: The files of the patients who underwent only posterolateral lumbosacral fusion for various indications between June 2021 and July 2022 were reviewed retrospectively. Patients who had had regular clinical follow-ups for at least six months postoperatively were included in the study. Preoperative and postoperative Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) scores were compared using the Wilcoxon Ordinal Signs test. A p-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Twenty patients were included in the study. The mean age of the patients was 68.2 ± 7.5 (54-79). Three (15%) of the patients were males, and seventeen (85%) were females. Improvement was observed in all three scores, i.e., VAS, ODI, and PSQI assessments. No correlation was found between the number of segments undergoing fusion, body mass index (BMI), and clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION: Spinal fusion surgery is still viewed as the gold standard treatment method for many indications. Posterolateral fusion provides adequate stabilization in many cases when applied correctly. However, the possibility of persistent or newly developing low back pain in the postoperative period as a result of mechanical reasons should not be forgotten, and patients should be informed about the same. Postoperative expectations should, thus, be shaped accordingly.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: A retrospective cohort study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of midline lumbar fusion (MIDLF) for lumbosacral fusion compared to posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). METHODS: Patients who had undergone posterior lumbosacral fusion surgery were divided into a MIDLF group (n = 37) and a PLIF group (n = 42). The follow-up time was at least 12 months. The operation data, recovery condition, complications, clinical outcomes, and status of implants and fusion were compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: The MIDLF group experienced significantly less blood loss, lower postoperative creatine kinase levels and total drainage volume, earlier time to ambulation, and less hospital stay times after surgery compared to the PLIF group (P < 0.05). The mean postoperative back pain visual analog scale scores in the MIDLF group were significantly lower than the PLIF group (P < 0.05). The improvement in Oswestry Disability Index scores during 3-month follow-up displayed a significant difference between the 2 groups (P < 0.05). The fusion rate tended to be higher in the MIDLF group; however, the difference was not significant (P > 0.05). There was no significant difference in respect to screw loosening and cage subsidence rate. There were 2 cases of complications both occurring in the PLIF group. CONCLUSIONS: MIDLF is safe and effective for lumbosacral fusion and in line with the concept of enhanced recovery after surgery.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Background: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of fluoroscopy-guided percutaneous sacroplasty in patients with sacral pedicle screws loosening after instrumented spinal fusion. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 18 patients who underwent percutaneous sacroplasty to treat sacral pedicle screws loosening from January 2016 to December 2019. Imaging studies, visual analog scale (VAS), length of hospital stay, and complications were recorded. The clinical outcomes based on the Oswestry disability index (ODI) and the modified Brodsky's criteria (MBC) were also evaluated to determine the efficacy of percutaneous sacroplasty. Results: All patients had undergone at least 1 year of follow-up in our institute (range, 12-24 months). The average VAS score was 5.6 (range, 4-7) before surgery and decreased to 1.7 (range, 1-3) at the final visit. All patients were discharged on the next day after surgery. No patients experienced complications, such as cement leakage, deep infection, or neurologic deterioration. All patients achieved good or excellent outcomes based on the MBC. The ODI scores improved from 51.8 preoperatively to 25.6 postoperatively. Conclusion: Percutaneous sacroplasty was an effective treatment approach for relieving the patient's symptoms caused by sacral pedicle screws loosening and could be a valuable treatment alternative to extensive revision surgery. Level of clinical evidence: IV.

RESUMEN

The sacroiliac joint (SIJ) constitutes the predominant pain source following lumbar or lumbosacral fusion. Although studies have investigated the biomechanical patterns of SIJ behaviors after lumbosacral fusion, the relationship between ligament strain and SIJ pain following lumbosacral fusion remains unclear. The present study developed a three-dimensional finite element model including L4, L5, sacrum, ilium, SIJ, and seven mainly ligaments. After successful validation, the model was used to investigate the biomechanics of SIJ and ligaments in simulating lumbosacral fusion process. Our results showed that small motion in a stable SIJ may significantly increases the contact pressure and stress of the SIJ, which increase the maximum contact pressure by 171%, 676%, 199%, and 203% and stress by 130%, 424%, 168%, and 241% for flexion, extension, bending, and axial rotation, respectively. An increase in contact pressure and stress in SIJ possibly causes pain at the SIJ, especially in extension and axial rotation. A comparison between the lumbosacral and intact models exhibited the maximum strain increase in the iliosacral ligament (ISL) and the ileal ligament (IL) under all loading conditions. The present study suggests that after lumbosacral fusion process, the ligament sudden increase or decrease is likely to lead sprain or strain ligament, especially ISL and IL thereby causing SIJ pain. This study may contribute to understand the relationship between SIJ ligaments and SIJ pain.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Intro: Sacral insufficiency fractures after lumbosacral fusion continue to establish themselves as a rare complication after surgery. The diagnosis can often be missed due to inconclusive imaging and non-specific symptoms. In the literature, the treatment of sacral insufficiency fractures varies from non-operative and conservative management to surgical intervention with lumbopelvic fixation. Methods: We performed a systematic review searching the PubMed database using sacral insufficiency fracture treatment after lumbosacral fusion and sacral insufficiency fracture after posterior spinal instrumentation as keywords. Results: This search strategy identified 32 publications from the PubMed database for literature review. After evaluating the inclusion and exclusion criteria, a total of 17 articles were included in the review. 65% of sacral insufficiency fractures were managed surgically with 35% of patients proceeding with non-operative, conservative management only. Revision surgery always involved sacropelvic fixation which typically led to immediate resolution or reduction of symptoms, with the exception of 2 cases that did not receive adequate reduction of symptoms. Five cases reported failed non-operative management that subsequently responded to revision surgery. Conclusion: Outcomes after non-operative management usually leads to symptom resolution; however has a slower symptom relief time as well as a higher chance of failed treatment. Operative outcomes, generally with a variation of sacropelvic fixation lead to immediate symptom resolution and very rarely failed treatment. Clinicians must always maintain a high index of suspicion of new onset lower back or sacral pain after lumbosacral surgery and order a CT scan to rule out a potential insufficiency fracture. Objectives: The objective of this study was to review the literature to examine treatment options for sacral insufficiency fractures after lumbosacral fusion in order to improve clinical practice and management. This systematic review of the literature regarding treatment of sacral insufficiency fractures will assist clinicians in making the accurate diagnosis and devise a strategic treatment plan for patients with sacral insufficiency fractures after spinal instrumentation.

RESUMEN

OF BACKGROUND DATA: Pedicle screws are commonly placed with lumbar/lumbosacral fusions. Triggered electromyography (tEMG), which employs the application of electrical current between the screw and a complementary anode to determine thresholds of conduction, may be utilized to confirm the safe placement of such implants. While previous research has established clinical thresholds associated with safe screw placement, there is variability in clinical practice of anode placement which could lead to unreliable measurements. PURPOSE: To determine the variance in pedicle screw stimulation thresholds when using four unique anode locations (ipsilateral/contralateral and paraspinal/gluteal relative to tested pedicle screws). STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. Tertiary medical center. PATIENT SAMPLE: Twenty patients undergoing lumbar/lumbosacral fusion with pedicle screws using tEMG OUTCOME MEASURES: tEMG stimulation return values are used to assess varied anode locations and reproducibility based on anode placement. METHODS: Measurements were assessed across node placement in ipsilateral/contralateral and paraspinal/gluteal locations relative to the screw being assessed. R2 coefficients of correlation were determined, and variances were compared with F-tests. RESULTS: A total of 94 lumbosacral pedicle screws from 20 patients were assessed. Repeatability was verified using two stimulations at each location for a subset of the screws with an R2 of 0.96. Comparisons between the four anode locations demonstrated R2 values ranging from 0.76 to 0.87. F-tests comparing thresholds between each anode site demonstrated all groups not to be statistically different. CONCLUSION: The current study, a first-of-its-kind formal evaluation of anode location for pedicle screw tEMG testing, demonstrated very strong repeatability and strong correlation with different locations of anode placement. These results suggest that there is no need to change the side of the anode for testing of left versus right screws, further supporting that placing an anode electrode into gluteal muscle is sufficient and will avoid a sharp ground needle in the surgical field.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Non-specific lower back pain caused by degenerative lumbar disease, such as disc and facet joint degeneration or spondylolisthesis, significantly impairs quality of life of patients and is associated with higher pain scores and reduced function. Patients that fail to respond to conservative treatment may require surgical intervention, such as lumbar interbody fusion (LIF). Compared to other approaches, an anterior approach to lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) has advantages regarding efficacy of fusion, visualization of relevant anatomy, and a larger allowable size of the interbody fusion device. An anterior approach's main biomechanical advantage includes the ability to restore sagittal alignment, achieve indirect decompression, and provide increased anterior column support. Complications of anterior interbody fusion are mostly approach related and include vascular injury or visceral injury. However, the anterior anatomy can make the placement of an interbody device challenging. In the case reported here, an ALIF procedure was complicated by immobile iliac vessels leaving a small window to place the interbody cage. Continuing with the anterior approach was opted, but with the oblique placement of a cage traditionally used in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) procedures.

RESUMEN

This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of circumferential minimally invasive surgery (CMIS) using lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) and percutaneous pedicle screw (PPS) in adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients, and to clarify the conditions for achieving postoperative pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis (PI-LL) < 10°. Demographics and other parameters of ASD patients who underwent CMIS and who were divided into groups G (achieved postoperative PI-LL < 10°) and P (PI-LL ≥ 10°) were compared. Of the 145 included ASD patients who underwent CMIS, the average fused level, bleeding volume, operative time, and number of intervertebral discs that underwent LLIF were 10.3 ± 0.5 segments, 723 ± 375 mL, 366 ± 70 min, and 4.0 segments, respectively. The rod material was titanium alloy in all the cases. The PI-LL significantly improved from 37.3 ± 17.9° to 1.2 ± 12.2° postoperatively. Pre- and postoperative PI, postoperative LL, preoperative PI-LL, PI-LL after LLIF, and postoperative PI-LL were significantly larger in group P. PI-LL after LLIF was identified as a significant risk factor of postoperative PI-LL < 10° by logistic regression, and the cut-off value on receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was 20°. Sufficient correction was achieved by CMIS. If PI-LL after LLIF was ≤20°, it was corrected to the ideal alignment by the PPS procedure.

RESUMEN

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective Study. OBJECTIVES: Sacroiliac buttress screws (SBS) and S2 alar iliac screws (SAI) are used as distal screws in cases with long fusion to the pelvis. Distal fixation ends, whether exceeding the sacroiliac joint (SIJ), may affect postoperative degenerative changes in the SIJ. The aim of this study was to investigate SIJ degeneration after lumbosacral and lumbopelvic fixation, using SBS and SAI in degenerative spine diseases, respectively. METHODS: This study included 70 patients aged ≥50 years with lumbosacral fusion (>3 levels). They were divided into 2 groups (SBS 20 and SAI 50 cases) based on the type of distal screws. Radiographical and clinical data were reviewed with a minimum 2-year follow-up. Radiographical SIJ degeneration was analyzed using computed tomography; clinical outcomes were evaluated using visual analog scale (VAS) and Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Questionnaire (JOABPEQ). RESULTS: No significant differences were observed in patients' preoperative characteristics between the 2 groups. The incidence of SIJ degeneration, including osteophyte formation (30.0% and 8.0%, p = 0.03), intraarticular air (75.0% and 16.0%, p < 0.001), and subchondral cyst (20.0% and 2.0%. p = 0.02) in SBS and SAI groups, respectively, at the follow-up, was significantly higher in the SBS group. Although SIJ degenerative changes were significantly different between the SBS and SAI groups, there was no significant difference in VAS and JOABPEQ scores between the groups at 2 years post-surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Lumbosacral fusion can cause SIJ degeneration, which is more frequent when SBS are used in fixation to the sacrum.

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: There is no consensus regarding the best surgical strategy at the lumbosacral junction (LSJ) in long constructs for adult spinal deformity (ASD). The use of interbody fusion (IF) has been advocated to increase fusion rates, with additional pelvic fixation (PF) typically recommended. The actual benefit of IF even when extending to the pelvis, however, has not been vigorously analyzed. The goal of this work was to better understand the role of IF, specifically with respect to arthrodesis, when extending long constructs to the ilium. METHODS: A systematic review of the PubMed and Cochrane databases was performed to identify the relevant studies in English, addressing the management of LSJ in long constructs (defined as ≥ 5 levels) in ASD. The search terms used were as follows: "Lumbosacral Junction," "Long Constructs," "Long Fusion to the Sacrum," "Sacropelvic Fixation," "Interbody Fusion," and "Iliac Screw." The authors excluded technical notes, case reports, literature reviews, and cadaveric studies; pediatric populations; pathologies different from ASD; studies not using conventional techniques; and studies focused only on alignment of different levels. RESULTS: The PRISMA protocol was used. The authors found 12 retrospective clinical studies with a total of 1216 patients who were sorted into 3 different categories: group 1, using PF or not (n = 6); group 2, using PF with or without IF (n = 5); and group 3, from 1 study comparing anterior lumbar interbody fusion versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Five studies in group 1 and 4 in group 2 had pseudarthrosis rate as primary outcome and were selected for a quantitative analysis. Forest plots were used to display the risk ratio, and funnel plots were used to look at the risk of publication bias. The summary risk ratios were 0.36 (0.23-0.57, p < 0.001) and 1.03 (0.54-1.96, p = 0.94) for the PF and IF, respectively; there is a protective effect of overall pseudarthrosis for using PF in long constructs for ASD surgeries, but not for using IF. CONCLUSIONS: The long-held contention that L5/S1 IF is always advantageous in long-construct deformity surgery is not supported by the current literature. Based on the findings from this systematic review and meta-analysis, PF with or without additional L5/S1 interbody grafting demonstrates similar overall construct pseudarthrosis rates. The added risk and costs associated with IF, therefore, should be more closely considered on a case-by-case basis.

RESUMEN

This research compared the incidence of adjacent segment pathology (ASP) between anterior interbody lumbar fusion (ALIF) treatment and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) treatment. Seventy patients were included in this retrospective study: 30 patients received ALIF treatment, and 40 patients received TLIF treatment at a single medical center between 2011 and 2020 with a follow-up of at least 12 months. The outcomes were radiographic adjacent segment pathology (RASP) and clinical adjacent segment pathology (CASP). The mean follow-up period was 42.10 ± 22.61 months in the ALIF group and 56.20 ± 29.91 months in the TLIF group. Following single-level lumbosacral fusion, ALIF is superior to TLIF in maintaining lumbar lordosis, whereas the risk of adjacent instability in the ALIF group is significantly higher. Regarding ASP, the incidence of overall RASP and CASP did not differ significantly between ALIF and TLIF groups.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: The effect of pelvic fixation on postoperative medical complications, blood transfusion, length of hospital stay, and discharge disposition is poorly understood. Determining factors that predispose patients to increased complications after spinopelvic fusion will help surgeons to plan these complex procedures and optimize patients preoperatively. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using data from the ACS-NSQIP database between 2006 and 2016 of patients who underwent lumbar fusion with and without spinopelvic fixation. Data regarding demographics, complications, hospital stay, and discharge disposition were collected. RESULTS: A total of 57,417 (98.5%) cases of lumbar fusion without spinopelvic fixation (LF) and 887 (1.5%) cases of lumbar fusion with spinopelvic fixation (SPF) were analyzed. The transfusion rate in the SPF group was 59.3% vs 13% in the LF group (p < 0.001). The mean length of stay (LOS) and discharge to skilled nursing facility (SNF) were significantly different (LOS: SPF 6.5 days vs LF 3.5 days p < 0.001; SNF: SPF 21.3% vs LF 10.4% p < 0.001). After controlling for demographic differences, the overall complication rates were not significantly different between the groups (p = 0.531). The odds ratio for transfusion in the SPF group was 2.9 (p < 0.001). The odds ratio for increased LOS and increased care discharge disposition were elevated in the SPF group (LOS OR: 1.3, p < 0.012, Discharge disposition OR: 1.8, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who underwent SPF had increased complications, transfusion rate, LOS, and discharge to SNF or subacute rehab facilities as compared with patients who underwent LF. SPF remains an effective technique for achieving lumbosacral arthrodesis. Surgeons should consider the implications of the associated complication profile for SPF and the value of preoperative optimization in a select cohort of patients.

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: One-third of low back pain cases are due to the sacroiliac (SI) joint. The incidence increases after lumbosacral fusion. A positive Fortin Finger Test points to the SI joint being the origin of the pain; however, clinical examination and imaging are not specific and minimally contributory. The gold standard is a test injection of local anesthetic. More than 70% reduction in pain after this injection confirms the SI joint is the cause of the pain. The aim of this study was to evaluate the decrease in pain on a Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) after intra-articular injection into the SI joint. We hypothesised that intra-articular SI injection will significantly reduce SI pain after lumbosacral fusion. METHODS: All patients with pain (NRS>7/10) suspected of being caused by SI joint syndrome 1 year after lumbosacral fusion with positive Fortin test were included. Patients with lumbar or hip pathologies or inflammatory disease of the SI joint were excluded. Each patient underwent a 2D-guided injection of local anesthetic into the SI joint. If this failed, a second 2D-guided injection was done; if this also failed, a third 3D-guided injection was done. Reduction of pain on the NRS by>70% in the first 2 days after the injection confirmed the diagnosis. Whether the injection was intra-articular or not, it was recorded. Ninety-four patients with a mean age of 57 years were included, of which 70% were women. RESULTS: Of the 94 patients, 85 had less pain (90%) after one of the three injections. The mean NRS was 8.6/10 (7-10) before the injection and 1.7/10 after the injection (0-3) (p=0.0001). Of the 146 2D-guided injections, 41% were effective and 61% were intra-articular. Of the 34 3D-guided injections, 73% were effective and 100% were intra-articular. DISCUSSION: This study found a significant decrease in SI joint-related pain after intra-articular injection into the SI joint in patients who still had pain after lumbosacral fusion. If this injection is non-contributive when CT-guided under local anesthesia, it can be repeated under general anesthesia with 3D O-arm guidance. This diagnostic strategy allowed us to confirm that pain originates in the SI joint after lumbosacral fusion in 9 of 10 patients. CONCLUSION: If the first two CT-guided SI joint injections fail, 3D surgical navigation is an alternative means of doing the injection that helps to significantly reduce SI joint-related pain after lumbosacral fusion. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV, retrospective study.

Asunto(s)