Removal versus Retention of Posterior Spinal Implants in Patients with Healed Thoracolumbar Fractures: Analysis of Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes-A Randomized Controlled Trial.

IF 1.2 Q3 SURGERY
Spine Surgery and Related Research Pub Date : 2024-10-05 eCollection Date: 2025-03-27 DOI:10.22603/ssrr.2024-0133
Mahmoud Fouad Ibrahim, Mahmoud Samir Mondy, Khaled Mohammed Hassan, Ahmed Shawky Abdelgawaad, Mohammad El-Sharkawi
{"title":"Removal versus Retention of Posterior Spinal Implants in Patients with Healed Thoracolumbar Fractures: Analysis of Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes-A Randomized Controlled Trial.","authors":"Mahmoud Fouad Ibrahim, Mahmoud Samir Mondy, Khaled Mohammed Hassan, Ahmed Shawky Abdelgawaad, Mohammad El-Sharkawi","doi":"10.22603/ssrr.2024-0133","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>There is ongoing debate over whether to remove or retain posterior spinal implants following the successful union of thoracolumbar fractures. This study aimed to compare clinical and radiographic outcomes following removal versus retention of posterior spinal implants in patients with healed thoracolumbar fractures.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All patients who underwent posterior short segment fixation for thoracolumbar (T11-L2) fractures and presented to the outpatient clinic of our institution (level I trauma center) from October 2020 to October 2022 were enrolled in the study. The participants were randomly assigned to one of the two groups. The EQ-5D-5L was the primary outcome of the study. The secondary outcomes were the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), loss of correction, and incidence of complications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 52 patients were included in the final analysis with 26 patients in each group. During the 6-month and 1-year follow-up visits, the implant removal group had a statistically significant improvement in the EQ-Index, EQ-VAS, and ODI, while there were no significant differences in these parameters in the implant retention group. There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding loss of correction (<i>P</i>=0.109).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In patients who have undergone posterior instrumentation for thoracolumbar fractures, the removal of implants following fracture consolidation demonstrates enhanced clinical outcomes when compared to retaining the implants. Although loss of correction is marginally higher in the implant removal group than in the retention group, this disparity did not attain statistical significance, nor did it correlate with inferior clinical outcomes. Furthermore, the incidence of complications following implant removal remained minimal. These findings emphasize the favorable efficacy and safety profile of implant removal procedures within this patient population.</p>","PeriodicalId":22253,"journal":{"name":"Spine Surgery and Related Research","volume":"9 2","pages":"226-236"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11983108/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Spine Surgery and Related Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22603/ssrr.2024-0133","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: There is ongoing debate over whether to remove or retain posterior spinal implants following the successful union of thoracolumbar fractures. This study aimed to compare clinical and radiographic outcomes following removal versus retention of posterior spinal implants in patients with healed thoracolumbar fractures.

Methods: All patients who underwent posterior short segment fixation for thoracolumbar (T11-L2) fractures and presented to the outpatient clinic of our institution (level I trauma center) from October 2020 to October 2022 were enrolled in the study. The participants were randomly assigned to one of the two groups. The EQ-5D-5L was the primary outcome of the study. The secondary outcomes were the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), loss of correction, and incidence of complications.

Results: A total of 52 patients were included in the final analysis with 26 patients in each group. During the 6-month and 1-year follow-up visits, the implant removal group had a statistically significant improvement in the EQ-Index, EQ-VAS, and ODI, while there were no significant differences in these parameters in the implant retention group. There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding loss of correction (P=0.109).

Conclusions: In patients who have undergone posterior instrumentation for thoracolumbar fractures, the removal of implants following fracture consolidation demonstrates enhanced clinical outcomes when compared to retaining the implants. Although loss of correction is marginally higher in the implant removal group than in the retention group, this disparity did not attain statistical significance, nor did it correlate with inferior clinical outcomes. Furthermore, the incidence of complications following implant removal remained minimal. These findings emphasize the favorable efficacy and safety profile of implant removal procedures within this patient population.

胸腰椎骨折愈合患者后路脊柱植入物去除与保留:临床和影像学结果分析-一项随机对照试验。
引言:关于胸腰椎骨折成功愈合后是否要移除或保留后路脊柱植入物的争论一直存在。本研究旨在比较胸腰椎骨折愈合患者后路脊柱植入物取出与保留后的临床和影像学结果。方法:所有于2020年10月至2022年10月在我院(创伤一级中心)门诊行后路短段固定治疗胸腰椎(T11-L2)骨折的患者纳入研究。参与者被随机分配到两组中。EQ-5D-5L是研究的主要结果。次要结果为Oswestry残疾指数(ODI)、矫正缺失和并发症发生率。结果:共纳入52例患者,每组26例。随访6个月和1年,拔除种植体组EQ-Index、EQ-VAS和ODI的改善有统计学意义,而保留种植体组在这些参数上无统计学差异。两组矫正失度差异无统计学意义(P=0.109)。结论:在胸腰椎骨折后路内固定的患者中,与保留内固定相比,骨折巩固后取出内固定物的临床效果更好。虽然种植体拔除组的矫形损失略高于保留组,但这种差异没有统计学意义,也与临床结果较差无关。此外,植入物移除后并发症的发生率仍然很小。这些发现强调了在这一患者群体中植入物移除手术的良好疗效和安全性。
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
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
71
审稿时长
15 weeks
×
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