A biomechanical comparison of ipsilateral and contralateral pedicle screw placement for modified triangular osteosynthesis in unstable pelvic fractures

Biomechanical Analysis of a Modified Triangular Osteosynthesis Technique for Treatment of Spinopelvic Dissociation

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the biomechanical stability of a modified triangular osteosynthesis construct with S1 pedicle screws compared with other described lumbopelvic fixation constructs in a U-type sacral fracture model.

METHODS

U-type sacral fractures were created in validated fourth-generation spinopelvic models. Four different constructs were cyclically loaded with displacement measured in all planes: (1) bilateral L5 pedicle screws with rods attached to iliac bolts, (2) bilateral L5 and S1 pedicle screws with rods attached to iliac bolts, (3) bilateral L5 pedicle screws with rods attached to iliac bolts with a transsacral-transiliac screw, and (4) bilateral L5 and S1 pedicle screws with rods attached to iliac bolts with a transsacral-transiliac screw.

RESULTS

The bilateral L5 and S1 pedicle screws with rods attached to iliac bolts with a transsacral-transiliac screw construct had significantly decreased horizontal, vertical, and angular displacement compared with all other constructs.

CONCLUSIONS

From a biomechanical perspective, a modified triangular osteosynthesis construct with S1 pedicle screws improves stability in fixation of U-type sacral fractures.

L4 fixation is not necessary in L5-Iliac spinopelvic fixation after trauma, but coadjutant transilio-transsacral fixation is

INTRODUCTION

Spinopelvic dissociation (SPD) is a severe injury characterized by a discontinuity between the spine and the bony pelvis consisting of a bilateral longitudinal sacral fracture, most of the times through sacral neuroforamen, and a horizontal fracture, usually through the S1 or S2 body. The introduction of the concept of triangular osteosynthesis has shown to be an advance in the stability of spinopelvic fixation (SPF). However, a controversy exists as to whether the spinal fixation should reach up to L4 and, if so, it should be combined with transiliac-transsacral screws (TTS).

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is to compare the biomechanical behavior in the laboratory of four different osteosynthesis constructs for SPD, including spinopelvic fixation of L5 versus L4 and L5; along with or without TTS in both cases.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

By means of a formerly described method by the authors, an unstable standardized H-type sacral fracture in twenty synthetic replicas of a male pelvis articulated to the lumbar spine, L1 to sacrum, (Model: 1300, SawbonesTM; Pacific Research Laboratories, Vashon, WA, USA), instrumented with four different techniques, were mechanically tested. We made 4 different constructs in 5 specimen samples for each construct. Groups: Group 1. Instrumentation of the L5-Iliac bones with TTS. Group 2. Instrumentation of the L4-L5-Iliac bones with TTS. Group 3. Instrumentation of L5-Iliac bones without TTS. Group 4: Instrumentation of L4-L5-Iliac bones without TTS.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

According to our results, it can be concluded that in SPD, better stability is obtained when proximal fixation is only up to L5, without including L4 (alternative hypothesis), the addition of transiliac-transsacral fixations is essential.

Clinical utility of minimally invasive posterior internal fixation within the pelvic ring using S2 alar iliac screws for unstable pelvic ring fracture

INTRODUCTION

Posterior internal fixation for unstable pelvic ring fractures is often associated with complications, including pelvic hemorrhage and gluteal necrosis. Pelvic ring fixation using the S2 alar iliac screw (SAIS) without fixation of the lumbosacral vertebrae may have potential as a novel, minimally invasive technique for treating unstable pelvic ring fractures. The present study compared clinical outcomes in patients who underwent SAIS fixation within the pelvic ring with a historical control group of patients who underwent conventional trans-iliac plate fixation for the treatment of unstable pelvic ring fractures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty-two patients diagnosed with unstable pelvic fractures with sacral fracture or sacroiliac joint fracture dislocation were retrospectively evaluated. Eight consecutive patients underwent trans-iliac plate fixation from April 2012 to March 2015, and 24 consecutive patients underwent SAIS fixation from April 2015 to February 2020. Rates of soft tissue complications, intraoperative blood loss, and intraoperative blood transfusion volume were compared in these two groups.

RESULTS

Mean intraoperative blood loss was significantly lower in patients who underwent SAIS fixation than in those who underwent trans-iliac plate fixation (141.0 ml vs 315.0 ml; P = 0.027), although there were no between-group differences in intraoperative blood transfusion volume (0.0 ml vs 140 ml; P = 0.105), incidence rate of soft tissue complications (4.2% vs 0%; P = 1.000), and operation time (88.5 min vs 93.0 min; P = 0.862). Bone healing was confirmed in all patients who underwent SAIS fixation without dislocation of the fracture site, whereas one patient who underwent trans-iliac plate fixation experienced a dislocation of the fracture site during follow-up (0% vs 12.5%; P = 0.250).

CONCLUSIONS

SAIS fixation reduces intraoperative blood loss and ensures bone healing without major complications, including dislocation of the fracture site. SAIS fixation may therefore be an alternative, minimally invasive method of treating unstable pelvic fractures.

Applicable safety analysis and biomechanical study of iliosacral triangular osteosynthesis

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to investigate the applicable safety and biomechanical stability of iliosacral triangular osteosynthesis (ITO) through 3D modeling and finite element (FE) analysis.

METHODS

Pelvic CT imaging data from 100 cases were imported into Mimics software for the construction of 3D pelvic models. The S2-alar-iliac (S2AI) screws and S2 sacroiliac screws were placed in the S2 segment with optimal distribution and their compatibility rate on the S2 safe channel was observed and analyzed. In the FE model, the posterior pelvic ring was fixed with two transsacral screws (TTS), triangular osteosynthesis (TO) and ITO, respectively. Four different loading methods were implemented in sequence to simulate the force in standing, flexion, right bending, and left twisting, respectively. The relative displacement and change in relative displacement of the three fixing methods were recorded and analyzed.

RESULTS

The theoretical compatibility rate of S2AI screw and S2 sacroiliac screw in S2 segment was 94%, of which 100% were in males and 88% in females. In the FE model, in terms of overall relative displacement, TTS group showed the smallest relative displacement, the ITO group showed the second smallest, and the TO group the largest relative displacement. The change in relative displacement of the TTS group displayed the smaller fluctuations in motion. The change in relative displacement of the TO group under right bending and left twisting displayed larger fluctuations, while the ITO group under flexion displayed larger fluctuations.

CONCLUSIONS

The simultaneous placement of S2AI screw and S2 sacroiliac screw in the S2 segment is theoretically safe. Although the biomechanical stability of ITO is slightly lower than TTS, it is better than TO, and can be used as a new method for the treatment of posterior pelvic ring injuries.

Pull-out strength evaluation of cement augmented iliac screws in osteoporotic spino-pelvic fixation

INTRODUCTION

Spino-pelvic fixation has been widely accepted for surgical treatment of sacral tumor, scoliosis surgery and pelvic fractures. Cement augmentation of screws is an option to improve implant stability in osteoporotic bone quality. Aim of the present study is to compare iliac screw fixation without cement fixation and two cement application options in a biomechanical testing.

HYPOTHESIS

Cement augmentation of iliac screws leads to superior pull-out strength.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Thirty female and osteoporotic human iliac bones were used. Three operation treatment groups were generated: Screw fixation (cannulated screws) without cement augmentation [Operation treatment (OT) A], screw fixation with cement augmentation before screw placement (cannulated screws) (OT B) and screw fixation with perforated screws and cement augmentation after screw placement (OTC). Pull-out tests were performed with a rate of 6mm/min. A load versus displacement curve was generated. Maximum pull-out force (N) was measured in the load-displacement curve.

RESULTS

Paired group 1 (OT A vs. OT B): Screw fixation without cement augmentation: 592.6N±335.07 and screw fixation with cement augmentation before screw placement: 996N±287.43 (p=0.0042). Paired group 2 (OT A vs. OT C): screw fixation without cement augmentation: 716.2N±385.86 and fenestrated screw fixation with cement augmentation after screw placement: 1324.88N±398.76 (p=0.0489). Paired group 3 (OT B vs. OT C): Screw fixation with cement augmentation before screw placement: 1077.2±486.66 and fenestrated screw fixation with cement augmentation after screw placement: 1298.2N±726.19 (p=0.3286).

DISCUSSION

Regarding iliac screw fixation for spino-pelvic ostesynthesis in osteoporotic bone, cement augmentation is significantly superior to solid iliac screw fixation respecting pull-out-strength. Nevertheless, further biomechanical studies are needed to verify these findings.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Not applicable; biomechanical cadaver study.

Biomechanical models of in vitro constructs for spinopelvic osteosynthesis

Spinopelvic lesions are the result of high-energy vertical trauma with axial skeletal overload where the spine impacts onto the sacrum, dissociating the lumbar spine from the pelvis. Therefore, lumbopelvic instrumentations are aimed to counteract these vertical forces, although various biomechanical aspects of the combinations of different constructs (with or without iliosacral screws) or the number of lumbar fixation levels (L5 or the combination of L5 with L4) are subject to controversy. The number of patients in each published series is too short, and the nature of the fixation is very different from one article to another, making comparison very difficult. In this paper the methodology for laboratory studies is discussed. The design of the test bench fixture, biomechanical testing protocol and data analysis are very important when inference to the clinical setting is desired.

Corridor-diameter-dependent angular tolerance for safe transiliosacral screw placement: an anatomic study of 433 pelves

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to determine the angular tolerance of the S1 and S2 segments to accommodate a transiliosacral screw across both sacroiliac joints.

HYPOTHESIS

We hypothesized that the angular tolerance for transiliosacral screw placement would be more constrained than the angular tolerance for iliosacral fixation in pelves where a safe osseous corridor was measured.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The cortical boundaries of the S1 and S2 sacral segments in 433 pelvic CTs were digitally mapped. A straight-line path was placed within each osseous corridor and extended across both SI joints past the outer iliac cortices. The diameter of the path was increased until it breached the cortex, geometrically determining maximum diameter (Dmax). Angular tolerance for screw placement was calculated with trigonometric analysis of the Dmax value of the corridor, and the average distance from the termination of the osseous corridor to the site of percutaneous insertion. Gender, age, and BMI were evaluated as independent predictors using binomial logistic regression.

RESULTS

The transiliosacral angular tolerance for the S1 and S2 osseous corridors was 1.53 ± 0.57 degrees and 1.02 ± 0.33 degrees, respectively. 68.9% of S1 corridors and 81.1% of S2 corridors had a safe zone (corridor diameter ≥ 10 mm) for transiliosacral placement, 48.3% of the pelves had a safe zone for both corridors, while 5.1% had no safe zones. Females had a less frequent Dmax ≥ 10 mm at S1, 52% vs 67% (p = 0.001), and at S2, 64% vs 86% (p < 0.001).

DISCUSSION

In conclusion, the angular tolerance of 1.53 and 1.03 degrees for the S1 and S2 segments, respectively, creating a narrow interval for safe passage of the trans-iliac and trans-sacral, with approximately 31.1% of patients not having a viable corridor for screw passage. A correlation exist between S1 and S2 corridors with Dmax ≥ 10 mm and the resulting increase in angular tolerance for safe passage of a transilioscral screw.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV

Level Retrospective Cohort.

Comparison of Biomechanical Performance of Five Different Treatment Approaches for Fixing Posterior Pelvic Ring Injury

Background

A large number of pelvic injuries are seriously unstable, with mortality rates reaching 19%. Approximately 60% of pelvic injuries are related to the posterior pelvic ring. However, the selection of a fixation method for a posterior pelvic ring injury remains a challenging problem for orthopedic surgeons. The aim of the present study is to investigate the biomechanical performance of five different fixation approaches for posterior pelvic ring injury and thus provide guidance on the choice of treatment approach in a clinical setting.

Methods

A finite element (FE) model, including the L3-L5 lumbar vertebrae, sacrum, and full pelvis, was created from CT images of a healthy adult. Tile B and Tile C types of pelvic fractures were created in the model. Five different fixation methods for fixing the posterior ring injury (PRI) were simulated: TA1 (conservative treatment), TA2 (S1 screw fixation), TA3 (S1 + S2 screw fixation), TA4 (plate fixation), and TA5 (modified triangular osteosynthesis). Based on the fixation status (fixed or nonfixed) of the anterior ring and the fixation method for PRI, 20 different FE models were created. An upright standing loading scenario was simulated, and the resultant displacements at the sacroiliac joint were compared between different models.

Results

When TA5 was applied, the resultant displacements at the sacroiliac joint were the smallest (1.5 mm, 1.6 mm, 1.6 mm, and 1.7 mm) for all the injury cases. The displacements induced by TA3 and TA2 were similar to those induced by TA5. TA4 led to larger displacements at the sacroiliac joint (2.3 mm, 2.4 mm, 4.8 mm, and 4.9 mm), and TA1 was the worst case (3.1 mm, 3.2 mm, 6.3 mm, and 6.5 mm).

Conclusions

The best internal fixation method for PRI is the triangular osteosynthesis approach (TA5), followed by S1 + S2 screw fixation (TA3), S1 screw fixation (TA2), and plate fixation (TA4).

Minimally invasive triangular osteosynthesis for highly unstable sacral fractures: Technical notes and preliminary clinical outcomes

Triangular osteosynthesis involves unilateral L5 iliac posterior instrumentation combined with an iliosacral screw fixation. The aim of this study was to describe this procedure and report the preliminary clinical results in patients with unstable sacral fractures treated with minimally invasive triangular osteosynthesis (MITO). Between 2012 and 2017, 10 patients (6 men and 3 women, mean age, 50 ± 23 years) with sacral fractures were treated with MITO and were followed up for a mean of 15.0 ± 8.5 months in our institution. Classification of sacral fracture, operative time, intraoperative bleeding, timing of full weight bearing, bone union, complications, and clinical outcomes were investigated. Two cases were classified as Denis zone 1, 2 cases as zone 2, and 6 as zone 3. Four patients had Roy-Camille type 1 fracture and 2 patients had type 2. All patients underwent MITO, which involved bilateral lumbopelvic fixation and a uni/bilateral iliosacral screw with stab incisions for percutaneous fixation or central longitudinal incision. The operative time was a mean of 182 ± 64 minutes, and the amount of intraoperative bleeding was a mean of 63 ± 74 g. Full-weight bearing was initiated at a mean of 8.2 ± 2.4 weeks. Eight fractures healed; 1 patient had pulmonary embolism and 1 had implant loosening. Based on Majeed score, 8 patients had "excellent" clinical outcomes, 1 patient had a "good" clinical outcome, and the other had a "fair" clinical outcome. MITO could be less invasive on the soft tissues and be a reliable procedure for bony union. It might provide sufficient stability to accelerate the commencement of post-operative rehabilitation, even in patients with highly unstable sacral fractures.