S2 alar-iliac screw versus traditional iliac screw for spinopelvic fixation: a systematic review of comparative biomechanical studies

A Misplaced S2 Alar-Iliac Screw Causing L5 Spinal Nerve Injury: A Report of a Rare Case

Although neurovascular structures, including the superior gluteal artery, sciatic nerve, obturator nerve, internal iliac vein and artery, and lumbosacral plexus, are at risk when S2 alar-iliac (S2AI) screws are used, no cases of nerve injuries have been reported. An 84-year-old man was referred to our institute with persistent left sciatica for seven months after undergoing salvage surgery using S2AI screws for deep surgical site infection from a previous posterior interbody fusion surgery at L5-S1. Based on the radiographic and diagnostic selective nerve root block findings, a diagnosis of left L5 radiculopathy was suspected due to the left S2AI screw being caudally misplaced and severely protruding into the pelvic cavity. The patient underwent surgical replacement of the left S2AI screw. The patient was discharged eight days postoperatively, with a resolution of the left leg pain. At the three-month follow-up, no recurrent pain was reported. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first reported case of a misplaced S2AI screw causing L5 spinal nerve injury. If the screw is inserted caudally and deviates into the pelvic cavity, in front of the sacroiliac joint, the L5 nerve running in this region may be damaged.

Implantation of S1AIS has priority as a sacroiliac joint fixation technique

PURPOSE

The sacral alar-iliac screw (SAIS) fixation technique has evolved from spinopelvic fixation which originated from S2AIS to sacroiliac joint fixation, with more reports regarding its application of S2AIS than S1AIS. However, there is a lack of comparative evidence to determine which technique is superior for sacroiliac joint fixation. This study aimed to determine which of the screws was superior in terms of implantation safety and biomechanical stability for sacroiliac joint fixation.

METHODS

CT data of 80 normal pelvises were analyzed to measure the insertable range, trajectory lengths and widths of both S1AIS and S2AIS on 3D reconstruction models. Φ 6.5 mm and 8.0 mm screws were implanted on the left and right sides of fifty 3D printed pelvic models respectively to observe for breach of screw implantation. Ten synthetic pelvis models were used to simulate type C Tile injuries, and divided into 2 groups with an anterior plate and posterior fixation using one S1AIS or S2AIS on each side. The stiffness and maximum load of the plated and fixated models were measured under vertical loading.

RESULTS

The trajectory lengths and widths of the S1AIS and S2AIS were similar (p > 0.05) and there was no breach for Φ 6.5 mm SAIS. However, both the insertable range and trajectory length on the sacral side of S2AIS (234.56 ± 10.06 mm2, 40.97 ± 2.81 mm) were significantly less, and the breach rate of the posterior lateral cortex of the Φ 8.0 mm S2AIS (46%) was significantly higher than the S1AIS (307.55 ± 10.42 mm2, 42.16 ± 3.06 mm, and 2%, p < 0.05). The stiffness and maximum load of S2AIS were less than S1AIS but the difference was not statistically significant (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

S1AIS and S2AIS have similar screw trajectories and stability. However, S1AIS has a larger insertable range, less breach of the posterior lateral sacral cortex and longer trajectory length on the sacral side than S2AIS, which indicates S1AIS has higher implantation safety and a trend of better mechanical performance over S2AIS for sacroiliac joint fixation. Furthermore, S2AIS with an excessively large diameter should be used with caution for sacroiliac joint fixation.

S2 alar-iliac screws are superior to traditional iliac screws for spinopelvic fixation in adult spinal deformity: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Spinopelvic fixation (SPF) using traditional iliac screws has provided biomechanical advantages compared to previous constructs, but common complications include screw prominence and wound complications. The newer S2 alar-iliac (S2AI) screw may provide a lower profile option with lower rates of complications and revisions for adult spinal deformity (ASD). The purpose of this study was to compare rates of complications and revision following SPF between S2AI and traditional iliac screws in patients with ASD.

METHODS

A PRISMA-compliant systematic literature review was conducted using Cochrane, Embase, and PubMed. Included studies reported primary data on adult patients undergoing S2AI screw fixation or traditional IS fixation for ASD. Primary outcomes of interest were rates of revision and complications, which included screw failure (fracture and loosening), symptomatic screw prominence, wound complications (dehiscence and infection), and L5-S1 pseudarthrosis.

RESULTS

Fifteen retrospective studies with a total of 1502 patients (iliac screws: 889 [59.2%]; S2AI screws: 613 [40.8%]) were included. Pooled analysis indicated that iliac screws had significantly higher odds of revision (17.1% vs 9.1%, OR = 2.45 [1.25-4.77]), symptomatic screw prominence (9.9% vs 2.2%, OR = 6.26 [2.75-14.27]), and wound complications (20.1% vs 4.4%, OR = 5.94 [1.55-22.79]). S2AI screws also led to a larger preoperative to postoperative decrease in pain (SMD = - 0.26, 95% CI = -0.50, - 0.011).

CONCLUSION

The findings from this review demonstrate higher rates of revision, symptomatic screw prominence, and wound complications with traditional iliac screws. Current data supports the use of S2AI screws specifically for ASD.

PROSPERO ID

CRD42022336515.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Connecting the S2 alar-iliac screw head to the satellite rod for surgical correction of degenerative sagittal imbalance

PURPOSE

The S2AI screw technique has several advantages over the conventional iliac screw fixation technique. However, connecting the S2AI screw head to the main rod is difficult due to its medial entry point. We introduce a new technique for connecting the S2AI screw head to a satellite rod and compare it with the conventional method of connecting the S2AI screw to the main rod.

METHODS

Seventy-four patients who underwent S2AI fixation for degenerative sagittal imbalance and were followed up for ≥ 2 years were included. All the patients underwent long fusion from T9 or T10 to the pelvis. The S2AI screw head was connected to the satellite rod (SS group) in 43 patients and the main rod (SM group) in 31 patients. In the SS group, the satellite rod was placed medial to the main rod and connected by the S2AI screw and domino connectors. In the SM group, the main rod was connected directly to the S2AI screw head and supported by accessory rods. Radiographic and clinical outcomes were evaluated in both groups.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in postoperative complications, including proximal junctional failure, proximal junctional kyphosis, rod breakage, screw loosening, wound problems, and infection between the two groups. Furthermore, the correction power of sagittal deformity and clinical results in the SS group were comparable to those in the SM group.

CONCLUSION

Connecting the S2AI screw to the satellite rod is a convenient method comparable to the conventional S2AI connection method in terms of radiological and clinical outcomes.

Pelvic Fixation Construct Trends in Spinal Deformity Surgery

Purpose

Although many techniques exist, spinopelvic fixation continues to present challenges in the management of adult spinal deformity. Shear forces, complex anatomy, and bone quality are common reasons why spine surgeons continue to explore options for fixation.

Methods

A retrospective chart reviewed of patients receiving pelvic fixation for adult spinal deformity over a 12-year period was conducted. Patients were divided into 3 cohorts based on date of surgery: (1) 2010 to 2013, (2) 2014 to 2017, and (3) 2018 to 2021. Pelvic fixation constructs in the study included traditional iliac screws, stacked S2-alar-iliac (S2AI screws), and triangular titanium implants.

Results

Of the 494 patients with multiple implant constructs who met the inclusion criteria for this study, patients undergoing pelvic fixation surgery who received at least 2 implants increased by approximately 5% every 4 years (90.2%, 94.6%, 99.1% respectively). Over the 12-year span, the implementation of the S2AI screw grew 120%.

Conclusion

At our institution, there is a trend toward using multiple bilateral implant constructs for pelvic fixation, with nearly a tenfold percentage increase between the most recent cohorts. These include iliac screws with S2AI screws, multiple stacked S2AI screws, and S2AI screws used in conjunction with triangular titanium implants in hopes to decrease implant failure.

Effect of Lumbar Fusion and Pelvic Fixation Rigidity on Hip Joint Stress: A Finite Element Analysis

STUDY DESIGN

This study compared hip stress among different types of lumbopelvic fusion based on finite element (FE) analysis.

OBJECTIVE

We believe that the number and placement of S2 alar iliac (AI) screws and whether the screws loosen likely influence hip joint stress in the FE model.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Spinopelvic fixation has been shown to increase the risk of progression for hip joint osteoarthritis. The biomechanical mechanism is not well understood. We hypothesize that the rigid pelvic fixation may induce stress at adjacent joints.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A three-dimensional nonlinear FE model was constructed from the L4 vertebra to the femoral bone. From the intact model, we made four fusion models, each with different lower vertebrae instrumentation: (1) intact, (2) L4-S1 fusion, (3) L4-S2 AI screw fixation, (4) L4-S2 AI screw fixation with S2 AI screw loosening, and (5) L4-S1 and dual sacral AI screw fixation. A compressive load of 400 N was applied vertically to the L4 vertebra, followed by an additional 10 Nm bending moment about different axes to simulate either flexion, extension, left lateral bending, or right axial rotation. The distal femoral bone was completely restrained. The von Mises stress and angular motion were analyzed across the hip joints within each fusion construct model.

RESULTS

Hip joint cartilage stress and range of motion increased for all postures as pelvic fixation became more rigid. The dual sacral AI screw fixation model increased stress and angular motion at the hip joint more than intact model. Our results suggest that more rigid fixation of the pelvis induces additional stress on the hip joint, which may precipitate or accelerate adjacent joint disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Dual sacral AI fixation led to the highest stress while loosening of S2 AI decreased stress on the hip joint. This study illustrates that more rigid fixation among lumbosacral fusion constructs increases biomechanical stress on the hip joints.

Biomechanical evaluation of multiple pelvic screws and multirod construct for the augmentation of lumbosacral junction in long spinal fusion surgery

Background: Posterior long spinal fusion was the common procedure for adult spinal deformity (ASD). Although the application of sacropelvic fixation (SPF), the incidence of pseudoarthrosis and implant failure is still high in long spinal fusion extending to lumbosacral junction (LSJ). To address these mechanical complications, advanced SPF technique by multiple pelvic screws or multirod construct has been recommended. This was the first study to compare the biomechanical performance of combining multiple pelvic screws and multirod construct to other advanced SPF constructs for the augmentation of LSJ in long spinal fusion surgery through finite element (FE) analysis.

Methods: An intact lumbopelvic FE model based on computed tomography images of a healthy adult male volunteer was constructed and validated. The intact model was modified to develop five instrumented models, all of which had bilateral pedicle screw (PS) fixation from L1 to S1 with posterior lumbar interbody fusion and different SPF constructs, including No-SPF, bilateral single S2-alar-iliac (S2AI) screw and single rod (SS-SR), bilateral multiple S2AI screws and single rod (MS-SR), bilateral single S2AI screw and multiple rods (SS-MR), and bilateral multiple S2AI screws and multiple rods (MS-MR). The range of motion (ROM) and stress on instrumentation, cages, sacrum, and S1 superior endplate (SEP) in flexion (FL), extension (EX), lateral bending (LB), and axial rotation (AR) were compared among models.

Results: Compared with intact model and No-SPF, the ROM of global lumbopelvis, LSJ, and sacroiliac joint (SIJ) was decreased in SS-SR, MS-SR, SS-MR, and MS-MR in all directions. Compared with SS-SR, the ROM of global lumbopelvis and LSJ of MS-SR, SS-MR, and MS-MR further decreased, while the ROM of SIJ was only decreased in MS-SR and MS-MR. The stress on instrumentation, cages, S1-SEP, and sacrum decreased in SS-SR, compared with no-SPF. Compared with SS-SR, the stress in EX and AR further decreased in SS-MR and MS-SR. The most significantly decreased ROM and stress were observed in MS-MR.

Conclusion: Both multiple pelvic screws and multirod construct could increase the mechanical stability of LSJ and reduce stress on instrumentation, cages, S1-SEP, and sacrum. The MS-MR construct was the most adequate to reduce the risk of lumbosacral pseudarthrosis, implant failure, and sacrum fracture. This study may provide surgeons with important evidence for the application of MS-MR construct in the clinical settings.

Comparative Clinical Efficacy and Safety of Sacral-2-Alar Iliac Screw Versus Iliac Screw in the Lumbosacral Reconstruction of Spondylodiscitis

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of S2-alar-iliac (S2AI) and iliac screw (IS) techniques in treating lumbosacral spondylodiscitis.

METHODS

Between January 2020 and January 2022, 28 patients suffering from lumbosacral spondylodiscitis underwent lumbosacral fixation and were divided into the IS group (14 patients) and the S2AI group (14 patients). Surgical details, demographic characteristics, preoperative and postoperative Oswestry Disability Index, visual analog scale, and complications were analyzed.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight patients were included in this study, including 14 patients treated with IS and 14 patients treated with S2AI. The 2 groups were similar in sex, age, follow-up period, total drainage volume, hospitalization stay, and fusion time. (P > 0.05) The estimated blood loss and surgical time of S2AI during surgery were significantly lower than those of IS. (P < 0.05) The visual analog scale and Oswestry Disability Index scores significantly improved in both groups from preoperative to the last follow-up. Sacroiliac joint pain was found in both groups in the follow-up period, but the incidence was not significantly different (P = 0.663). Compared with the IS approach, the incidence of symptomatic screw prominence was lower in the S2AI group, but the difference was not significant. (P = 0.088).

CONCLUSIONS

S2AI, as well as IS techniques, can achieve promising results for reconstructing lumbosacral stability in spondylodiscitis. In addition, the S2AI technique can also reduce surgical trauma and operation time.