Transiliac-Transsacral Screw Fixation is Superior to Lumbopelvic Stabilization in the Treatment of Minimally Displaced Sacral H-/U-Type Fragility Fractures.

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Jan Gewiess, Ysaline Emilie Roth, Paul Heini, Lorin M Benneker, Christoph Emanuel Albers
{"title":"Transiliac-Transsacral Screw Fixation is Superior to Lumbopelvic Stabilization in the Treatment of Minimally Displaced Sacral H-/U-Type Fragility Fractures.","authors":"Jan Gewiess, Ysaline Emilie Roth, Paul Heini, Lorin M Benneker, Christoph Emanuel Albers","doi":"10.1177/21925682241268141","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Retrospective Cohort Study.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To compare the outcomes and complications of transiliac-transsacral screw fixation (TIS) and lumbopelvic fixation (LPS), the 2 most common fixation methods for nondisplaced and minimally displaced H-/U- type sacral fragility fractures.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Medical records of patients treated with TIS or LPS for nondisplaced and minimally displaced H-/U-type sacral fragility fractures at 2 level A trauma centers between 2012 and 2022 were analyzed. Postoperative low back pain and mobility levels were assessed as primary outcomes before discharge and at 6 weeks and 6 months postoperatively. Surgery time, blood loss, and surgical complication rates were assessed as secondary outcomes. Statistical analyses consisted of Fisher's exact tests for frequency distributions and Mann-Whitney-U tests and t-tests for group comparisons.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>52 patients undergoing TIS (mean age: 78 ± 9 years) and 36 patients undergoing LPS (74 ± 10 years) with no discrepancy in demographic parameters were identified. There were no differences in low back pain levels between the 2 groups before surgery, before discharge, at 6 weeks postoperatively, and at 6 months postoperatively (<i>P</i> > 0.05). There were no differences in mobility levels before surgery, before discharge, at 6 weeks postoperatively, and at 6 months postoperatively (<i>P</i> > 0.05). Duration of surgery was shorter after TIS (36 ± 13 min) compared to LPS (113 ± 31 min) (<i>P</i> < 0.0001). Intraoperative blood loss was lower for TIS (median <20 mL) compared to LPS (median 125 mL) (<i>P</i> < 0.0001). Postoperative radiculopathy was less frequent after TIS (n = 1) compared to LPS (n = 3) (<i>P</i> > 0.05). Median length of stay was shorter after TIS (11 days) compared to LPS (14 days) (<i>P</i> < 0.05). Rates of reoperations directly related to the index surgery were lower after TIS (n = 2) compared to LPS (n = 10) (<i>P</i> < 0.01). Implant failures were observed only after LPS (n = 1).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Patients with nondisplaced and minimally displaced H-/U- type sacral fragility fractures may preferably be treated using TIS, as it is equivalent to LPS in terms of low back pain reduction and restoration of mobility, but allows for shorter operative time, less blood loss and lower reoperation rates. Prospective randomized studies should be conducted to substantiate our findings and develop distinct treatment recommendations.</p>","PeriodicalId":12680,"journal":{"name":"Global Spine Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Spine Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/21925682241268141","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Study design: Retrospective Cohort Study.

Objectives: To compare the outcomes and complications of transiliac-transsacral screw fixation (TIS) and lumbopelvic fixation (LPS), the 2 most common fixation methods for nondisplaced and minimally displaced H-/U- type sacral fragility fractures.

Methods: Medical records of patients treated with TIS or LPS for nondisplaced and minimally displaced H-/U-type sacral fragility fractures at 2 level A trauma centers between 2012 and 2022 were analyzed. Postoperative low back pain and mobility levels were assessed as primary outcomes before discharge and at 6 weeks and 6 months postoperatively. Surgery time, blood loss, and surgical complication rates were assessed as secondary outcomes. Statistical analyses consisted of Fisher's exact tests for frequency distributions and Mann-Whitney-U tests and t-tests for group comparisons.

Results: 52 patients undergoing TIS (mean age: 78 ± 9 years) and 36 patients undergoing LPS (74 ± 10 years) with no discrepancy in demographic parameters were identified. There were no differences in low back pain levels between the 2 groups before surgery, before discharge, at 6 weeks postoperatively, and at 6 months postoperatively (P > 0.05). There were no differences in mobility levels before surgery, before discharge, at 6 weeks postoperatively, and at 6 months postoperatively (P > 0.05). Duration of surgery was shorter after TIS (36 ± 13 min) compared to LPS (113 ± 31 min) (P < 0.0001). Intraoperative blood loss was lower for TIS (median <20 mL) compared to LPS (median 125 mL) (P < 0.0001). Postoperative radiculopathy was less frequent after TIS (n = 1) compared to LPS (n = 3) (P > 0.05). Median length of stay was shorter after TIS (11 days) compared to LPS (14 days) (P < 0.05). Rates of reoperations directly related to the index surgery were lower after TIS (n = 2) compared to LPS (n = 10) (P < 0.01). Implant failures were observed only after LPS (n = 1).

Conclusion: Patients with nondisplaced and minimally displaced H-/U- type sacral fragility fractures may preferably be treated using TIS, as it is equivalent to LPS in terms of low back pain reduction and restoration of mobility, but allows for shorter operative time, less blood loss and lower reoperation rates. Prospective randomized studies should be conducted to substantiate our findings and develop distinct treatment recommendations.

经髂骨-经骶骨螺钉固定在治疗微小移位的骶骨H型/U型脆性骨折中优于腰椎骨盆固定。
研究设计回顾性队列研究:比较经髂横骶螺钉固定术(TIS)和腰椎骨盆固定术(LPS)的疗效和并发症:分析了2012年至2022年期间在两家A级创伤中心接受TIS或LPS治疗的无移位和微移位H/U型骶骨脆性骨折患者的医疗记录。出院前、术后6周和6个月的主要结果是评估术后腰痛和活动度。手术时间、失血量和手术并发症发生率作为次要结果进行评估。统计分析包括频率分布的费舍尔精确检验和组间比较的 Mann-Whitney-U 检验和 t 检验:结果:52 名接受 TIS 治疗的患者(平均年龄:78 ± 9 岁)和 36 名接受 LPS 治疗的患者(74 ± 10 岁)的人口统计学参数无差异。两组患者在术前、出院前、术后 6 周和术后 6 个月的腰背疼痛程度均无差异(P > 0.05)。术前、出院前、术后6周和术后6个月的活动能力水平没有差异(P > 0.05)。与 LPS(113 ± 31 分钟)相比,TIS 的手术时间更短(36 ± 13 分钟)(P < 0.0001)。TIS 的术中失血量较低(中位数 P < 0.0001)。与 LPS(3 例)相比,TIS(1 例)术后根神经病的发生率较低(P > 0.05)。与 LPS(14 天)相比,TIS 术后的中位住院时间更短(11 天)(P < 0.05)。与 LPS(10 例)相比,TIS(2 例)术后与指数手术直接相关的再手术率较低(P < 0.01)。结论:结论:无移位和微移位的 H-/U- 型骶骨脆性骨折患者最好采用 TIS 治疗,因为它在减轻腰痛和恢复活动能力方面与 LPS 相当,但手术时间更短、失血更少、再手术率更低。应开展前瞻性随机研究,以证实我们的研究结果,并制定独特的治疗建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Global Spine Journal
Global Spine Journal Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
8.30%
发文量
278
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: Global Spine Journal (GSJ) is the official scientific publication of AOSpine. A peer-reviewed, open access journal, devoted to the study and treatment of spinal disorders, including diagnosis, operative and non-operative treatment options, surgical techniques, and emerging research and clinical developments.GSJ is indexed in PubMedCentral, SCOPUS, and Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信