Efficacy and safety of lumbopelvic fixation in spinal metastasis comparing S2 Alar-iliac screw and conventional iliac screw.

IF 2.6 3区医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY

European Spine Journal Pub Date : 2025-03-19 DOI:10.1007/s00586-025-08774-4

Pawin Akkarawanit, Siravich Suvithayasiri, Borriwat Santipas, Sirichai Wilartratsami, Panya Luksanapruksa

{"title":"Efficacy and safety of lumbopelvic fixation in spinal metastasis comparing S2 Alar-iliac screw and conventional iliac screw.","authors":"Pawin Akkarawanit, Siravich Suvithayasiri, Borriwat Santipas, Sirichai Wilartratsami, Panya Luksanapruksa","doi":"10.1007/s00586-025-08774-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: The clinical issue of lumbosacral metastases (LM) is really significant. This study aims to compare in patients with lumbar pathology (LM) the outcomes of the conventional iliac (CI) screw technique against the S2 alar-iliac (S2AI).Methods: A retrospective review of institutional databases was performed for lumbar metastasis patients. who underwent lumbopelvic fixation, with or without decompression, between April 2014 and April 2022. Demographic information, reoperation rates, operational time, estimated blood loss (EBL), and length of hospital stay (LOS) were collected. Patient-reported outcomes were the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and EQ-5D-5L, which were examined both before and after surgery.Results: A total of 38 patients were involved in the study, with 21 allocated to the S2AI group and 17 to the CI group. The S2AI group demonstrated a length of stay (LOS) of 13.38 ± 8.35 days, in contrast to 24.35 ± 21.59 days, yielding a p-value of 0.047. The estimated blood loss in the S2AI group exhibited a decrease (592.86 ± 353.92 ml compared to 1073.53 ± 1122.45 ml; P = 0.137), alongside a reduction in operative time (181.19 ± 47.35 min versus 207.06 ± 105.69 min; variance = 0.648). Within the CI group, there were six patients who encountered surgical complications, accounting for 35.3%, while the S2AI group noted an absence of complications. The postoperative outcomes demonstrated a notable enhancement in both cohorts.Conclusions: Compared to CI, S2AI had better reoperation rates, estimated blood loss, operating duration, and length of stay. Both groups improved patient-reported outcomes, but the S2AI group improved significantly three months after surgery.","PeriodicalId":12323,"journal":{"name":"European Spine Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Spine Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-025-08774-4","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

Purpose: The clinical issue of lumbosacral metastases (LM) is really significant. This study aims to compare in patients with lumbar pathology (LM) the outcomes of the conventional iliac (CI) screw technique against the S2 alar-iliac (S2AI).

Methods: A retrospective review of institutional databases was performed for lumbar metastasis patients. who underwent lumbopelvic fixation, with or without decompression, between April 2014 and April 2022. Demographic information, reoperation rates, operational time, estimated blood loss (EBL), and length of hospital stay (LOS) were collected. Patient-reported outcomes were the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and EQ-5D-5L, which were examined both before and after surgery.

Results: A total of 38 patients were involved in the study, with 21 allocated to the S2AI group and 17 to the CI group. The S2AI group demonstrated a length of stay (LOS) of 13.38 ± 8.35 days, in contrast to 24.35 ± 21.59 days, yielding a p-value of 0.047. The estimated blood loss in the S2AI group exhibited a decrease (592.86 ± 353.92 ml compared to 1073.53 ± 1122.45 ml; P = 0.137), alongside a reduction in operative time (181.19 ± 47.35 min versus 207.06 ± 105.69 min; variance = 0.648). Within the CI group, there were six patients who encountered surgical complications, accounting for 35.3%, while the S2AI group noted an absence of complications. The postoperative outcomes demonstrated a notable enhancement in both cohorts.

Conclusions: Compared to CI, S2AI had better reoperation rates, estimated blood loss, operating duration, and length of stay. Both groups improved patient-reported outcomes, but the S2AI group improved significantly three months after surgery.

查看原文本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

European Spine Journal 医学-临床神经学

CiteScore

4.80

自引率

10.70%

发文量

373

审稿时长

2-4 weeks

期刊介绍： "European Spine Journal" is a publication founded in response to the increasing trend toward specialization in spinal surgery and spinal pathology in general. The Journal is devoted to all spine related disciplines, including functional and surgical anatomy of the spine, biomechanics and pathophysiology, diagnostic procedures, and neurology, surgery and outcomes. The aim of "European Spine Journal" is to support the further development of highly innovative spine treatments including but not restricted to surgery and to provide an integrated and balanced view of diagnostic, research and treatment procedures as well as outcomes that will enhance effective collaboration among specialists worldwide. The “European Spine Journal” also participates in education by means of videos, interactive meetings and the endorsement of educative efforts. Official publication of EUROSPINE, The Spine Society of Europe