scholarly journals Implant-Bone Interface of Sacroiliac Joint Fusion Using iFuse Implant System

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
M. J. Scheyerer ◽  
M. W. Hüllner ◽  
C. Pietsch ◽  
P. Veit-Haibach ◽  
C. M. L. Werner
Keyword(s):  
Bone Ingrowth ◽  
Tracer Uptake ◽  
Low Grade ◽  
Effective Treatment Option ◽  
Conservative Care ◽  
Joint Fusion ◽  
Sacroiliac Joint Fusion ◽  
Si Joint ◽  
Implant System ◽  
Mean Time

Introduction. Treatment of patients with SI joint pain is mostly limited to conservative care. However, in those with chronic pain and consequently prolonged mobilisation, internal fixation of the SI joint is often indicated. The aim of the present study was to assess stability and bone ingrowth of minimally invasive SI joint arthrodesis using a series of triangular, porous plasma coated implants (iFuse Implant System) using SPECT/CT. Material. We report ten cases of SI joint arthrodesis with a novel MIS SI joint fusion system. SPECT/CT was performed in all cases after a mean time of 5.8 months to evaluate bony ingrowth and stability within the SI joint. Results. In eight cases, no or only low tracer uptake could be visualized as an indicator of stability and bone ingrowth. Two patients have increased tracer uptake due to a second trauma-related ipsilateral sacral fracture and a low-grade infection. Conclusion. We could visualize satisfying osseous integration as well as stability within the SI joint after arthrodesis using iFuse Implant System. Therefore iFuse Implant System seems to be an effective treatment option in selected patients.

scholarly journals Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Joint Fusion: One-Year Outcomes in 40 Patients

2013 ◽  
Vol 2013 ◽  
pp. 1-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald Sachs ◽  
Robyn Capobianco
Keyword(s):  
Joint Pain ◽  
Facet Joint ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Effective Treatment Option ◽  
Trochanteric Bursitis ◽  
Joint Fusion ◽  
One Year ◽  
Si Joint ◽  
Implant System

Background. SI joint pain is difficult to diagnose due to overlapping symptoms of the lumbar spine, and until recently, treatment options have been limited. The purpose of this retrospective study is to report on the safety and effectiveness of MIS SI joint arthrodesis using a series of triangular, porous plasma coated implants in patients refractory to conservative care.Methods. We report on the first 40 consecutive patients with one-year follow-up data that underwent MIS SI joint fusion with the iFuse Implant System (SI-BONE, Inc., San Jose, CA) by a single surgeon. Medical charts were reviewed for demographics, perioperative metrics, complications, pain scores, and satisfaction.Results. Mean age was 58 years (range 30–81) and 75% of patients were female. Postoperative complications were minimal and included transient trochanteric bursitis (5%), facet joint pain (20%), and new low back pain (2.5%). There were no reoperations at one year. Mean pain score improved from 8.7 (1.5 SD) at baseline to 0.9 (1.6) at 12 months, a 7.8-point improvement (P<.001). Patient satisfaction was very high.Conclusions. The results of this case series reveal that MIS SI joint fusion using the iFuse Implant System is a safe and effective treatment option in carefully selected patients.

scholarly journals Biplanar x-ray fluoroscopy for sacroiliac joint fusion

2016 ◽  
Vol 41 (videosuppl1) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vicente Vanaclocha-Vanaclocha ◽  
Francisco Verdú-López ◽  
Nieves Sáiz-Sapena ◽  
Juan Manuel Herrera ◽  
Marlon Rivera-Paz
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Conservative Management ◽  
Sacroiliac Joint ◽  
Da Vinci ◽  
Lateral Projection ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Joint Fusion ◽  
Sacroiliac Joint Fusion ◽  
Si Joint ◽  
Biplanar Fluoroscopy

Chronic pain originating from the sacroiliac joint (SI) can cause severe dysfunction. Although many patients respond to conservative management with NSAIDs, some do need further treatment in the form of SI joint fusion (SIJF). To achieve safe and successful SIJF, intraoperative x-ray fluoroscopy is mandatory to avoid serious damages to nearby vascular and neural structures. Each step of the procedure has to be confirmed by anteroposterior (AP) and lateral projections. With a single-arm x-ray, the arch has to be moved back and forth for the AP and lateral projections, and this lengthens the procedure. To achieve the same results in less time, the authors introduced simultaneous biplanar fluoroscopy with 2 x-ray arches. After the patient is positioned prone with the legs spread apart in the so-called Da Vinci position, one x-ray arch for the lateral projection is placed at a right angle to the patient, and a second x-ray machine is placed with its arch between the legs of the patient. This allows simultaneous AP and lateral x-ray projections and, in the authors' hands, markedly speeds up the procedure. Biplanar fluoroscopy allows excellent AP and lateral projections to be made quickly at any time during the surgical procedure. This is particularly useful in cases of bilateral SI joint fusion if both sides are done at the same time.The video can be found here: https://youtu.be/TX5gz8c765M.

scholarly journals Sacroiliac Joint Fusion Methodology - Minimally Invasive Compared to Screw-Type Surgeries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (22;1) ◽  
pp. 29-40
Author(s):  
Zung Vu Tran
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Physical Function ◽  
Sacroiliac Joint ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Pain Disability ◽  
Joint Fusion ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Sacroiliac Joint Fusion ◽  
Si Joint

Background: Sacroiliac (SI) joint fusion represents a unique area of orthopedic surgery with procedural literature dating to the early 1920s, showing limited innovation in either technique or hardware over the last 90 years. Recent improvements in the diagnosis and treatment of SI joint dysfunction warrant comparisons to older surgical techniques. Objective: To evaluate treatment efficacies and patient outcomes associated with minimally invasive joint fusion in comparison to screw-type surgeries. Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Setting: Electronic databases, EMBASE, Pubmed (Medline), manual bibliography cross-referencing for published works until Dec. 31, 2017. Methods: A thorough literature search was performed in adherence to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology. Data repositories accessed included Pubmed and EMBASE, until Dec. 31, 2017. All studies evaluating sacroiliac joint fusion and reporting quantifiable outcome data were included. Exclusion criteria included nonhuman studies, qualitative reviews, and meta-analyses. Data compilation, coding, and extraction were performed using MedAware Systems proprietary software. Data from each study were extracted by 2 analysts, using software that allowed automatic comparisons of all data fields. The standardized mean difference (SMD) was used as a summary statistic for pooling outcomes data across studies. Multiple outcome measures were grouped into 3 categories, according to similarity of measurements - Pain, Disability/Physical Function, and Global/QOL. Results: A total of 20 studies had adequate data to calculate a SMD, and were included in the meta-analysis. Results of iFuse trials were compared to screw type trials, pooled in 3 categories of outcomes - Pain, Disability/Physical Function, and Global/QOL. The Pain category showed a statistically significant (P = 0.03) difference in outcomes for patients receiving the iFuse implant compared to screw types (SMD = 2.04 [95%CI: 1.76 to 2.33] vs. 1.28 [95%CI: 0.47 to 2.09]), with iFuse showing significantly better outcomes. The Disability category also showed a statistically significant (P = 0.01) difference in outcomes for patients receiving the iFuse implant compared to screw types (SMD = 1.68 [95%CI: 1.43 to 1.94] vs. 0.26 [95%CI: -1.90 to 2.41]), with iFuse showing significantly better outcomes. For Global/Quality of Life (QOL) outcomes, there was a significant difference (P = 0.04) between iFuse and screw-type procedures (SMD = 0.99 [95%CI: 0.75 to 1.24] vs. 0.60 [95%CI: 0.33 to 0.88]), with iFuse showing significantly better outcomes. There was a statistically significant correlation between lower baseline Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) values and better post treatment outcomes (r2 = 0.47, P < 0.01, and r2 = 0.30, P < 0.01, respectively). An association was found between pain at baseline and better outcomes (r2 = 0.21, P < 0.01), where worse baseline pain was associated with better outcomes. Limitations: There was a limited number of studies in this meta-analysis with treatments that could be properly classified as screw-type. Conclusion: In this analysis, compared to screw-type surgeries, the iFuse system showed statistically superior outcomes. This was the case when outcome measures were classified into 3 main categories - Pain, Disability/Physical Function, and Global/QOL. Key words: Meta-analysis, systematic review, sacroiliac joint, sacroiliac joint fusion

scholarly journals Sacroiliac Joint Arthrodesis-MIS Technique with Titanium Implants: Report of the First 50 Patients and Outcomes

2012 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 495-502 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leonard Rudolf
Keyword(s):  
Sacroiliac Joint ◽  
Titanium Implants ◽  
Point Change ◽  
Joint Fusion ◽  
Sacroiliac Joint Disruption ◽  
Clinically Significant ◽  
Spine Surgeon ◽  
Sacroiliac Joint Fusion ◽  
Si Joint

This retrospective study of 50 consecutive patients treated by a single orthopedic spine surgeon in private practice was conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion using a series of triangular, porous plasma spray coated titanium implants.Medical charts were reviewed for perioperative metrics, complications, pain, quality of life and satisfaction with surgery. All patients were contacted at a 24 months post-op to assess SI joint pain, satisfaction with surgery and work status.An early and sustained statistically significant improvement in pain function was identified at all post-operative time points (ANOVA, p<0.000). A clinically significant improvement (>2 point change from baseline) was observed in 7 out of 9 domains of daily living. The complication rate was low and more than 80% of patients would have the same surgery again.MIS SI joint fusion appears to be a safe and effective procedure for the treatment of sacroiliac joint disruption or degenerative sacroiliitis.

scholarly journals The Safety Profile of Percutaneous Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Joint Fusion

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. 874-880 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan Gregory Shamrock ◽  
Anand Patel ◽  
Milad Alam ◽  
Keith Hayden Shamrock ◽  
Motasem Al Maaieh
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Common Adverse Event ◽  
Complication Rates ◽  
Safe Procedure ◽  
Joint Fusion ◽  
Pain Ratings ◽  
Patient Optimization ◽  
Sacroiliac Joint Fusion ◽  
Si Joint

Study Design: Literature review. Objectives: Systematic review of the existing literature to determine the safety of minimally invasive (MI) sacroiliac (SI) joint fusion through the determination of the rate of procedural and device-related intraoperative and postoperative complications. Methods: All original studies with reported complication rates were included for analysis. Complications were defined as procedural if secondary to the MI surgery and device related if caused by placement of the implant. Complication rates are reported using descriptive statistics. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed for preoperative and postoperative Visual Analog Score (VAS) pain ratings and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores. Results: Fourteen studies of 720 patients (499 females/221 males) with a mean follow-up of 22 months were included. Ninety-nine patients (13.75%) underwent bilateral SI joint arthrodesis resulting in a total of 819 SI joints fused. There were 91 reported procedural-related complications (11.11%) with the most common adverse event being surgical wound infection/drainage (n = 17). Twenty-five adverse events were attributed to be secondary to placement of the implant (3.05%) with nerve root impingement (n = 13) being the most common. The revision rate was 2.56%. MI SI joint fusion reduced VAS scores from 82.42 (95% confidence interval [CI] 79.34-85.51) to 29.03 (95% CI 25.05-33.01) and ODI scores from 57.44 (95% CI 54.73-60.14) to 29.42 (95% CI 20.62-38.21). Conclusions: MI SI joint fusion is a relatively safe procedure but is not without certain risks. Further work must be done to optimize the procedure’s complication profile. Possible areas of improvement include preoperative patient optimization, operative technique, and use of intraoperative real-time imaging.

scholarly journals Minimally Invasive Endoscopic Spine Surgical Techniques for Treating Radiculopathy Secondary to Sacroiliac Joint Fusion Complications: Case Series

2021 ◽  
pp. 7-12
Author(s):  
Albert Telfeian
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Endoscopic Treatment ◽  
Surgical Techniques ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Bone Fragment ◽  
Endoscopic Spine Surgery ◽  
Joint Fusion ◽  
Minimally Invasive Spine ◽  
Sacroiliac Joint Fusion ◽  
Si Joint

Background: Minimally invasive SI joint fusion has increased in popularity. A possible complication that can result from the procedure is a radiculopathy (sacral or lumbar) that is caused by placement of the SI joint fusion implant. Case Report: Two cases are presented: A 60-year-old woman with a S1 radiculopathy secondary to a cortical bone fragment contacting the S1 nerve, and a 62-year-old man with a L5 radiculopathy and the anteriorly directed SI joint fusion implant positioned anteriorly and compressing on the L5 nerve. Both patients had resolution of their symptoms with endoscopic treatment. Conclusion: An endoscopic treatment is suggested here for radiculopathy secondary to minimally invasive SI joint fusion. Key words: Endoscopic spine surgery, lumbar radiculopathy, minimally invasive spine, SI joint fusion

scholarly journals Sacroiliac Joint Fusion: One Year Clinical and Radiographic Results Following Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Joint Fusion Surgery

2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 679-689 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard A. Kube ◽  
Jeffrey M. Muir
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Sacroiliac Joint ◽  
Joint Pain ◽  
Fusion Rate ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Post Procedure ◽  
Joint Fusion ◽  
One Year ◽  
Sacroiliac Joint Fusion ◽  
Si Joint

Background:Recalcitrant sacroiliac joint pain responds well to minimally-invasive surgical (MIS) techniques, although long-term radiographic and fusion data are limited.Objective:To evaluate the one-year clinical results from a cohort of patients with chronic sacroiliac (SI) joint pain unresponsive to conservative therapies who have undergone minimally invasive SI joint fusion.Methods:SI joint fusion was performed between May 2011 and January 2014. Outcomes included radiographic assessment of fusion status, leg and back pain severityviavisual analog scale (VAS), disabilityviaOswestry Disability Index (ODI) and complication rate. Outcomes were measured at baseline and at follow-up appointments 6 months and 12 months post-procedure.Results:Twenty minimally invasive SI joint fusion procedures were performed on 18 patients (mean age: 47.2 (14.2), mean BMI: 29.4 (5.3), 56% female). At 12 months, the overall fusion rate was 88%. Back and leg pain improved from 81.7 to 44.1 points (p<0.001) and from 63.6 to 27.7 points (p=0.001), respectively. Disability scores improved from 61.0 to 40.5 (p=0.009). Despite a cohort containing patients with multiple comorbidities and work-related injuries, eight patients (50%) achieved the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in back pain at 12 months, with 9 (69%) patients realizing this improvement in leg pain and 8 (57%) realizing the MCID in ODI scores at 12 months. No major complications were reported.Conclusion:Minimally invasive SI joint surgery is a safe and effective procedure, with a high fusion rate, a satisfactory safety profile and significant improvements in pain severity and disability reported through 12 months post-procedure.

Sacroiliac Joint Fusion

2017 ◽  
pp. 429-439
Author(s):  
Sharon C. Yson ◽  
Jonathan N. Sembrano ◽  
David W. Polly
Keyword(s):  
Sacroiliac Joint ◽  
Joint Fusion ◽  
Sacroiliac Joint Fusion

Minimally Invasive versus Open Sacroiliac Joint Fusion: A Comparison of Outcomes in Propensity Matched Cohorts

2014 ◽  
Vol 14 (11) ◽  
pp. S154
Author(s):  
Charles Gerald T. Ledonio ◽  
David W. Polly ◽  
Marc Swiontkowski
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Sacroiliac Joint ◽  
Joint Fusion ◽  
Sacroiliac Joint Fusion
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document