scholarly journals Is fusion necessary for thoracolumbar burst fracture treated with spinal fixation? A systematic review and meta-analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 27 (5) ◽  
pp. 584-592 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juliete M. Diniz ◽  
Ricardo V. Botelho
Keyword(s):  
Internal Fixation ◽  
Randomized Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Spinal Fixation ◽  
Surgical Time ◽  
Intraoperative Bleeding ◽  
Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures ◽  
Kyphosis Correction ◽  
Burst Fractures ◽  
Significant Difference

OBJECTIVEThoracolumbar fractures account for 90% of spinal fractures, with the burst subtype corresponding to 20% of this total. Controversy regarding the best treatment for this condition remains. The traditional surgical approach, when indicated, involves spinal fixation and arthrodesis. Newer studies have brought the need for fusion associated with internal fixation into question. Not performing arthrodesis could reduce surgical time and intraoperative bleeding without affecting clinical and radiological outcomes. With this study, the authors aimed to assess the effect of fusion, adjuvant to internal fixation, on surgically treated thoracolumbar burst fractures.METHODSA search of the Medline and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases was performed to identify randomized trials that compared the use and nonuse of arthrodesis in association with internal fixation for the treatment of thoracolumbar burst fractures. The search encompassed all data in these databases up to February 28, 2016.RESULTSFive randomized/quasi-randomized trials, which involved a total of 220 patients and an average follow-up time of 69.1 months, were included in this review. No significant difference between groups in the final scores of the visual analog pain scale or Low Back Outcome Scale was detected. Surgical time and blood loss were significantly lower in the group of patients who did not undergo fusion (p < 0.05). Among the evaluated radiological outcomes, greater mobility in the affected segment was found in the group of those who did not undergo fusion. No significant difference between groups in the degree of kyphosis correction, loss of kyphosis correction, or final angle of kyphosis was observed.CONCLUSIONSThe data reviewed in this study suggest that the use of arthrodesis did not improve clinical outcomes, but it was associated with increased surgical time and higher intraoperative bleeding and did not promote significant improvement in radiological parameters.

scholarly journals Short Segment versus Long Segment Pedicle Screws Fixation in Management of Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures: Meta-Analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 150-160 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tarek Ahmed Aly
Keyword(s):  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Screw Fixation ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Pedicle Screw Fixation ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures ◽  
Burst Fractures ◽  
Significant Difference

<p>Posterior pedicle screw fixation has become a popular method for treating thoracolumbar burst fractures. However, it remains unclear whether additional fixation of more segments could improve clinical and radiological outcomes. This meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the effectiveness of fixation levels with pedicle screw fixation for thoracolumbar burst fractures. MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Springer, and Google Scholar were searched for relevant randomized and quasirandomized controlled trials that compared the clinical and radiological efficacy of short versus long segment for thoracolumbar burst fractures managed by posterior pedicle screw fixation. Risk of bias in included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Based on predefined inclusion criteria, Nine eligible trials with a total of 365 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Results were expressed as risk difference for dichotomous outcomes and standard mean difference for continuous outcomes with 95% confidence interval. Baseline characteristics were similar between the short and long segment fixation groups. No significant difference was identified between the two groups regarding radiological outcome, functional outcome, neurologic improvement, and implant failure rate. The results of this meta-analysis suggested that extension of fixation was not necessary when thoracolumbar burst fracture was treated by posterior pedicle screw fixation. More randomized controlled trials with high quality are still needed in the future.</p>

scholarly journals THORACOLUMBAR BURST FRACTURES, SHORT X LONG FIXATION: A META-ANALYSIS

2016 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 78-84 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlos Alberto Assunção Filho ◽  
Filipe Cedro Simões ◽  
Gabriel Oliveira Prado
Keyword(s):  
Blood Loss ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Postoperative Period ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures ◽  
Kyphosis Correction ◽  
Burst Fractures ◽  
Significant Difference

ABSTRACT The number of fixed segments in the surgical treatment of thoracolumbar burst fractures remains controversial. This study aims to compare the results of short and long fixation in thoracolumbar burst fractures through a meta-analysis of studies published recently. MEDLINE and Cochrane databases were used. Randomized controlled trials and non-randomized comparative studies (prospective and retrospective) were selected. Data were analyzed with the software Review Manager. There was no statistically significant difference in the Cobb angle of preoperative kyphosis. Long fixation showed lower average measurements postoperatively (MD = 1.41; CI = 0.73-2.08; p<0.0001) and in the last follow-up (MD = 3.98; CI = 3.22-4.75; p<0.00001). The short fixation showed the highest failure rates (RD = 4.03; CI = 1.33-12.16; p=0.01) and increased loss of height of the vertebral body (MD = 1.24; CI = 0.49-1.98; p=0.001), with shorter operative time (MD = -24.54; CI = -30.16 - -18.91; p<0.00001). There was no significant difference in blood loss and clinical outcomes. The high rates of kyphosis correction loss with short fixation and the lower correction rate in the immediate postoperative period were validated. There was no significant difference in the blood loss rates because arthrodesis was performed in a short segment in the analyzed studies. The short fixation was performed in a shorter operative time, as expected. No study has shown superior clinical outcomes. The short fixation had worse rates of kyphosis correction in the immediate postoperative period, and increased loss of correction in long-term follow-up, making the long fixation an effective option in the management of this type of fracture.

scholarly journals Implant Removal Versus Implant Retention Following Posterior Surgical Stabilization of Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 219256822110054
Author(s):  
Barry Ting Sheen Kweh ◽  
Terence Tan ◽  
Hui Qing Lee ◽  
Martin Hunn ◽  
Susan Liew ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Implant Removal ◽  
Correction Loss ◽  
Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures ◽  
Burst Fractures ◽  
Retention Group ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Implant Retention ◽  
Removal Group

Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Objectives: To compare biomechanical and functional outcomes between implant removal and implant retention following posterior surgical fixation of thoracolumbar burst fractures. Methods: A search of the MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar and Cochrane Databases was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Results: Of the 751 articles initially retrieved, 13 published articles pooling 673 patients were included. Meta-analysis revealed there was a statistically significant improvement in sagittal Cobb Angle by 16.48 degrees (9.13-23.83, p < 0.01) after surgical stabilization of thoracolumbar burst fractures. This correction decremented to 9.68 degrees (2.02-17.35, p < 0.01) but remained significant at the time of implant removal approximately 12 months later. At final follow-up, the implant removal group demonstrated a 10.13 degree loss (3.00-23.26, p = 0.13) of reduction, while the implant retention group experienced a 10.17 degree loss (1.79-22.12, p = 0.10). There was no statistically significant difference in correction loss between implant retention and removal cohorts (p = 0.97). Pooled VAS scores improved by a mean of 3.32 points (0.18 to 6.45, p = 0.04) in the combined removal group, but by only 2.50 points (-1.81 to 6.81, p = 0.26) in the retention group. Oswestry Disability Index scores also improved after implant removal by 7.80 points (2.95-12.64, p < 0.01) at 1 year and 11.10 points (5.24-16.96, p < 0.01) at final follow-up. Conclusions: In younger patients with thoracolumbar burst fractures who undergo posterior surgical stabilization, planned implant removal results in superior functional outcomes without significant difference in kyphotic angle correction loss compared to implant retention.

scholarly journals Combined Anterior-Posterior Surgery Versus Posterior Surgery for Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures: A Systematic Review of the Literature

2010 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 93-100 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pim P. Oprel ◽  
Wim E Tuinebreijer ◽  
Peter Patka ◽  
Dennis den Hartog
Keyword(s):  
Posterior Approach ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Burst Fracture ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Review Of The Literature ◽  
Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures ◽  
Posterior Surgery ◽  
Burst Fractures ◽  
Posterior Group ◽  
Anterior Posterior

Study Design: A systematic quantitative review of the literature. Objective: To compare combined anterior-posterior surgery versus posterior surgery for thoracolumbar fractures in order to identify better treatments. Summary of Background Data: Axial load of the anterior and middle column of the spine can lead to a burst fracture in the vertebral body. The management of thoracolumbar burst fractures remains controversial. The goals of operative treatment are fracture reduction, fixation and decompressing the neural canal. For this, different operative methods are developed, for instance, the posterior and the combined anterior-posterior approach. Recent systematic qualitative reviews comparing these methods are lacking. Methods: We conducted an electronic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS and the Cochrane Central Register for Controlled Trials. Results: Five observational comparative studies and no randomized clinical trials comparing the combined anteriorposterior approach with the posterior approach were retrieved. The total enrollment of patients in these studies was 755 patients. The results were expressed as relative risk (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and weighted mean difference (WMD) for continuous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Conclusions: A small significantly higher kyphotic correction and improvement of vertebral height (sagittal index) observed for the combined anterior-posterior group is cancelled out by more blood loss, longer operation time, longer hospital stay, higher costs and a possible higher intra- and postoperative complication rate requiring re-operation and the possibility of a worsened Hannover spine score. The surgeons’ choices regarding the operative approach are biased: worse cases tended to undergo the combined anterior-posterior approach.

scholarly journals Treatment of Unstable Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures by Indirect Reduction and Posterior Stabilization: Short-Segment Versus Long-Segment Stabilization

2010 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
George Sapkas ◽  
Konstantinos Kateros ◽  
Stamatios A Papadakis ◽  
Emmanouel Brilakis ◽  
George Macheras ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cobb Angle ◽  
Study Groups ◽  
Short Segment ◽  
Patient’S Satisfaction ◽  
Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures ◽  
Radiological Parameters ◽  
Transpedicular Instrumentation ◽  
Burst Fractures ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Segment Versus

In order to compare short-segment stabilization with long-segment stabilization for treating unstable thoracolumbar fractures, we studied fifty patients suffered from unstable thoracolumbar burst fractures. Thirty of them were managed with long-segment posterior transpedicular instrumentation and twenty patients with short- segment stabilization. The mean follow up period was 5.2 years. Pre-operative and post-operative radiological parameters, like the Cobb angle, the kyphotic deformation and the Beck index were evaluated. A statistically significant difference between the two under study groups was noted for the Cobb angle and the kyphotic deformation, while, as far as the Beck index is concerned, no significant difference was noted. In conclusion, either the long-segment or the short-segment stabilization is able for reducing the segmental kyphosis and the vertebral body deformation postoperatively. However, as time goes by, the long-segment stabilization is associated with better results as far as the radiological parameters, the indexes and the patient’s satisfaction are concerned.

scholarly journals Plate osteosynthesis of single metacarpal fracture: WALANT technique is a cost-effective approach to reduce postoperative pain and discomfort in contrast to general anesthesia and wrist block

BMC Surgery ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yen-Chang Lin ◽  
Wei-Chieh Chen ◽  
Chun-Yu Chen ◽  
Shyh-Ming Kuo
Keyword(s):  
Internal Fixation ◽  
General Anesthesia ◽  
Functional Recovery ◽  
Intraoperative Complications ◽  
Postoperative Vomiting ◽  
Surgical Time ◽  
Metacarpal Fractures ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Anesthesia Time ◽  
No Tourniquet

Abstract Background The WALANT (wide-awake local anesthesia with no tourniquet) technique was based on local infiltration of lidocaine and epinephrine. This technique has rapidly gained popularity in recent years and can perform most hand operations. This study aimed to investigate the time spent on anesthesia and operation and perform an economic analysis among general anesthesia, wrist block with a tourniquet, and the WALANT technique for the internal fixation of metacarpal fractures. Methods We retrospectively reviewed all the single metacarpal fractures managed with the same procedure, open reduction, and internal fixation with the plate between January 2015 and December 2019. They were divided into three groups according to the method of anesthesia: (1) general anesthesia (GA group), (2) wrist block with a tourniquet (WB group), and (3) WALANT technique (WALANT group). We collected and analyzed patient demographic data, perioperative or postoperative complications, number of hospital days, and postoperative functional recovery assessment. Results A total of 63 patients met the inclusion criteria, including 24 in the GA group, 28 in the wrist block group using a tourniquet, and 11 in the WALANT group. There were no complications during the operation and follow-up in each group. The GA group had an average of 32.8 min of anesthesia time, significantly longer than the other two groups. However, there is no significant difference regarding surgical time among the presenting three groups. The discomfort of vomiting and nausea after surgery occurred in 20 patients in the GA group (38.1%). Nevertheless, there was no postoperative vomiting and nausea present in both the WB and WALANT groups. Most patients achieved full recovery of pre-injury interphalangeal and metacarpophalangeal motion at the final assessment of functional recovery. Conclusions The patients undergoing metacarpal fixation surgery under WALANT or WB had significantly less anesthesia time and postoperative vomiting and nausea. Moreover, there was no difference in surgical time and intraoperative complications. The time-related reduction improved the utilization of the operation room for additional cases. The reduction of the preoperative examination, anesthesia fee, postoperative recovery room observation, and hospitalization can effectively reduce medical costs. Furthermore, the WALANT group is more acceptable because of no tourniquet, which commonly causes discomfort.

Treatment of Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures with Polymethyl Methacrylate Vertebroplasty and Short-segment Pedicle Screw Fixation

Neurosurgery ◽  
2003 ◽  
Vol 53 (6) ◽  
pp. 1354-1361 ◽  
Author(s):  
Der-Yang Cho ◽  
Wuen-Yen Lee ◽  
Pon-Chun Sheu
Keyword(s):  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Screw Fixation ◽  
Pedicle Screw Fixation ◽  
Vertebral Height ◽  
Short Segment ◽  
Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures ◽  
Kyphosis Correction ◽  
Burst Fractures ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B

Abstract OBJECTIVES We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of reinforcing short-segment pedicle screw fixation with polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) vertebroplasty in patients with thoracolumbar burst fractures. METHODS We enrolled 70 patients with thoracolumbar burst fractures for treatment with short-segment pedicle screw fixation. Fractures in Group A (n = 20) were reinforced with PMMA vertebroplasty during surgery. Group B patients (n = 50) were not treated with PMMA vertebroplasty. Kyphotic deformity, anterior vertebral height, instrument failure rates, and neurological function outcomes were compared between the two groups. RESULTS Kyphosis correction was achieved in Group A (PMMA vertebroplasty) and Group B (Group A, 6.4 degrees; Group B, 5.4 degrees). At the end of the follow-up period, kyphosis correction was maintained in Group A but lost in Group B (Group A, 0.33-degree loss; Group B, 6.20-degree loss) (P = 0.0001). After surgery, greater anterior vertebral height was achieved in Group A than in Group B (Group A, 12.9%; Group B, 2.3%) (P &lt; 0.001). During follow-up, anterior vertebral height was maintained only in Group A (Group A, 0.13 ± 4.06%; Group B, −6.17 ± 1.21%) (P &lt; 0.001). Patients in both Groups A and B demonstrated good postoperative Denis Pain Scale grades (P1 and P2), but Group A had better results than Group B in terms of the control of severe and constant pain (P4 and P5) (P &lt; 0.001). The Frankel Performance Scale scores increased by nearly 1 in both Groups A and B. Group B was subdivided into Group B1 and B2. Group B1 consisted of patients who experienced instrument failure, including screw pullout, breakage, disconnection, and dislodgement (n = 11). Group B2 comprised patients from Group B who did not experience instrument failure (n = 39). There were no instrument failures among patients in Group A. Preoperative kyphotic deformity was greater in Group B1 (23.5 ± 7.9 degrees) than in Group B2 (16.8 ± 8.40 degrees), P &lt; 0.05. Severe and constant pain (P4 and P5) was noted in 36% of Group B1 patients (P &lt; 0.001), and three of these patients required removal of their implants. CONCLUSION Reinforcement of short-segment pedicle fixation with PMMA vertebroplasty for the treatment of patients with thoracolumbar burst fracture may achieve and maintain kyphosis correction, and it may also increase and maintain anterior vertebral height. Good Denis Pain Scale grades and improvement in Frankel Performance Scale scores were found in patients without instrument failure (Groups A and B2). Patients with greater preoperative kyphotic deformity had a higher risk of instrument failure if they did not undergo reinforcement with vertebroplasty. PMMA vertebroplasty offers immediate spinal stability in patients with thoracolumbar burst fractures, decreases the instrument failure rate, and provides better postoperative pain control than without vertebroplasty.

Comparison of thoracolumbosacral orthosis and no orthosis for the treatment of thoracolumbar burst fractures: interim analysis of a multicenter randomized clinical equivalence trial

2009 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 295-303 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher S. Bailey ◽  
Marcel F. Dvorak ◽  
Kenneth C. Thomas ◽  
Michael C. Boyd ◽  
Scott Paquett ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Interim Analysis ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Outcome Measure ◽  
Skeletal Maturity ◽  
Burst Fracture ◽  
Equivalence Trial ◽  
Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures ◽  
Burst Fractures ◽  
Significant Difference

Object The authors compared the outcome of patients with thoracolumbar burst fractures treated with and without a thoracolumbosacral orthosis (TLSO). Methods As of June 2002, all consecutive patients satisfying the following inclusion criteria were considered eligible for this study: 1) the presence of an AO Classification Type A3 burst fractures between T-11 and L-3, 2) skeletal maturity and age < 60 years, 3) admission within 72 hours of injury, 4) initial kyphotic deformity < 35°, and 5) no neurological deficit. The study was designed as a multicenter prospective randomized clinical equivalence trial. The primary outcome measure was the score based on the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire assessed at 3 months postinjury. Secondary outcomes are assessed until 2 years of follow-up have been reached, and these domains included pain, functional outcome and generic health-related quality of life, sagittal alignment, length of hospital stay, and complications. Patients in whom no orthotic was used were encouraged to ambulate immediately following randomization, maintaining “neutral spinal alignment” for 8 weeks. The patients in the TLSO group began being weaned from the brace at 8 weeks over a 2-week period. Results Sixty-nine patients were followed to the primary outcome time point, and 47 were followed for up to 1 year. No significant difference was found between treatment groups for any outcome measure at any stage in the follow-up period. There were 4 failures requiring surgical intervention, 3 in the TLSO group and 1 in the non-TLSO group. Conclusions This interim analysis found equivalence between treatment with a TLSO and no orthosis for thoracolumbar AO Type A3 burst fractures. The influence of a brace on early pain control and function and on long-term 1- and 2-year outcomes remains to be determined. However, the authors contend that a thoracolumbar burst fracture, in exclusion of an associated posterior ligamentous complex injury, is inherently a very stable injury and may not require a brace.

scholarly journals Does Combined Anterior-Posterior Approach Improve Outcomes Compared with Posterioronly Approach in Traumatic Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures?: A Systematic Review

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 388-398 ◽  
Author(s):  
Terence Tan ◽  
Tom J. Donohoe ◽  
Milly Shu-Jing Huang ◽  
Joost Rutges ◽  
Travis Marion ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Functional Outcomes ◽  
Posterior Approach ◽  
Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Burst Fractures ◽  
Posterior Group ◽  
Estimated Blood Loss ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Anterior Posterior

The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the surgical, radiological, and functional outcomes of posterior-only versus combined anterior-posterior approaches in patients with traumatic thoracolumbar burst fractures. The ideal approach (anterior-only, posterior-only, or combined anterior-posterior) for the surgical management of thoracolumbar burst fracture remains controversial, with each approach having its advantages and disadvantages. A systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines was performed (registration no., CRD42018115120). The authors reviewed comparative studies evaluating posterior-only approach compared with combined anterior-posterior approaches with respect to clinical, surgical, radiographic, and functional outcome measures. Five retrospective cohort studies were included. Postoperative neurological deterioration was not reported in either group. Operative time, estimated blood loss, and postoperative length of stay were increased among patients in the combined anterior-posterior group in one study and equivalent between groups in another study. No significant difference was observed between the two approaches with regards to long-term postoperative Cobb angle (mean difference, −0.2; 95% confidence interval, −5.2 to 4.8; <i>p</i> =0.936). Moreover, no significant difference in functional patient outcomes was observed in the 36item Short-Form Health Survey, Visual Analog Scale, and return-to-work rates between the two groups. The available evidence does not indicate improved clinical, radiologic (including kyphotic deformity), and functional outcomes in the combined anterior-posterior and posterior-only approaches in the management of traumatic thoracolumbar burst fractures. Further studies are required to ascertain if a subset of patients will benefit from a combined anterior-posterior approach.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document