Sacral fractures complicating thoracolumbar fusion to the sacrum

Incidence and Risk Factors of Sacral Fracture Following Lumbosacral Fusion for Degenerative Spinal Stenosis with a Minimum Follow-Up of 2 Years: A Case-Control Study

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to investigate the incidence and risk factors for sacral fractures following lumbosacral fusion.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of patients who underwent lumbosacral fusion for degenerative spinal stenosis with a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Patients who developed and those who did not develop a sacral fracture were categorized into the "sacral fracture" and "nonfracture" groups. The demographic and radiological data were compared between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

A total of 65 patients were included in this study. Among them, 7 patients were categorized into the sacral fracture and 58 patients into the nonfracture groups, respectively. The incidence of sacral fracture was 10.8%. In the sacral fracture group, age and fusion levels were significantly higher (P<0.05), while bone mineral density (BMD) T-score was significantly lower (P<0.05) than nonfracture group. Pelvic incidence, preoperative pelvic tilt, postoperative sacral slope, and postoperative lumbar lordosis were significantly higher (P<0.05) in the sacral fracture than the nonfracture group. Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that BMD T-score (odds ratio [OR] 0.25, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.08-0.79, P = 0.019), postoperative sacral slope (OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.00-1.29, P = 0.047), and changes in L4-S1 lordosis (OR 1.11, 95% CI 1.00-1.23, P = 0.049) were significant factors.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall incidence of sacral fracture was 10.8%. In our study, advanced age, low BMD, long fusion levels, and preoperative compensatory pelvic retroversion and excessive correction of it were risk factors for sacral fractures.

A Case of U-shaped Sacral Fracture After Longstanding Spinopelvic Fixation Treated With Percutaneous Sacroiliac Joint Fusion and Iliosacral Osteosynthesis

Sacral fractures are pelvic ring injuries that usually occur following a fall from height and may present with neurological injury. They are divided into several subtypes based on the pattern and location of injury. Certain subtypes require operative management due to the risk of neural compromise and inadequate axial load transfer, limiting mobility. Spinopelvic fixation has been reported as an efficient surgical treatment to restore the stability of U-shaped sacral fractures and to accelerate healing by relieving sacral stress. It is unclear if low-velocity sacral fractures occurring after longstanding lumbosacral fusion with pelvic fixation require additional surgical intervention. An elderly female with osteoporosis and prior T4-pelvis instrumented fusion sustained a fragility sacral fracture and was treated conservatively. At follow-up, she developed a symptomatic U-shaped sacral fracture. The increased fracture displacement and nonunion were chiefly attributed to sacroiliac joint hypermobility. A percutaneous osteosynthesis at the S1 and S2 levels was performed with a novel type of implant to achieve concomitant sacroiliac joint stabilization and fusion. Implants were placed with the help of intraoperative three-dimensional imaging and image-guided navigation to avoid the previously installed pelvic hardware. In summary, U-shaped fractures can develop nonunion despite pre-existing spinopelvic fixation and can be treated adequately with percutaneous iliosacral osteosynthesis. A sacroiliac joint fixation and fusion should be considered in the same setting as sacroiliac joint instability may contribute to or exacerbate nonunion.

Clinical Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Fragility Fractures of the Pelvis

BACKGROUND

Fragility fractures of the pelvis (FFPs) are osteoporotic pelvic fractures or insufficiency pelvic fractures caused by the low energy injury or stress fracture in daily livings in the elderly more than 60 years, which the incidence is increasing with the aging population in our country. FFPs result in considerable morbidity and mortality and as well as massive financial burden on the already strained health systems throughout the world.

METHODS

This clinical guideline was initiated by the Trauma Orthopedic Branch of Chinese Orthopedic Association; the External Fixation and Limb Reconstruction Branch of Chinese Orthopedic Association; the National Clinical Research Center for Orthopedics, Sports Medicine & Rehabilitation; Senior Department of Orthopedics of Chinese PLA general hospital; the Third Hospital of Hebei Medical University. The grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE) approach and the reporting items for practice guidelines in healthcare (RIGHT) checklist were adopted.

RESULTS

22 evidence based recommendations were formulated based on 22 most concerned clinical problems among orthopedic surgeons in China.

CONCLUSION

Understanding these trends through this guideline will facilitate better clinical care of FFP patients by medical providers and better allocation of resources by policy makers.

Insufficiency Fractures vs. Low-Energy Pelvic Ring Fractures - Epidemiological, Diagnostic and Therapeutic Characteristics of Fragility Fractures of the Pelvic Ring

BACKGROUND

Fragility fractures of the pelvis (FFP) encompass two fracture entities: fracture after low-energy trauma and insufficiency fracture without trauma. It is unclear whether the two subgroups differ in terms of diagnosis and therapy. The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate insufficiency fractures with regard to defined parameters and to compare specific parameters with the fractures after low-energy trauma.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In the period from 2008 to 2017, 203 patients with FFP were recorded at our clinic (Level 1 Trauma Centre DGU, SAV approval). Of these, 25 had an insufficiency fracture and 178 had a pelvic ring fracture after low-energy trauma. Epidemiological, diagnostic and therapeutic parameters were examined.

RESULTS

There was a relative increase in the insufficiency fracture within the FFP (2008 - 2009: 5.0% vs. 2015 - 2017: 17.8%). In these patients, osteoporosis tended to be more pronounced than in patients after low-energy trauma (t-value: - 3.66 vs. - 3.13). The diagnosis of insufficiency fractures showed increased use of MRI and DECT (60.9% vs. 26.0%) and a high proportion of type IV fractures after FFP (40.0% vs. 7.9%). In terms of therapy, surgical treatment of the insufficiency fracture was sought more often (68,2% vs. 52,1%), with a tendency towards increased use of combined osteosynthesis procedures (14.3% vs. 7.6%).

CONCLUSION

We were able to show that as the number of cases increases, the insufficiency fracture becomes more important within FFP. If these patients tend to have more pronounced osteoporosis, particular attention should be paid to the diagnosis and adequate therapy of the osteoporosis, especially in the case of an insufficiency fracture. In addition to the increased diagnostic testing using MRI and DECT to detect oedema and the increased surgical therapy for this type of fracture, it is also noteworthy that the insufficiency fracture can cause higher-grade fractures after FFP.

Risk factors for L5 pedicle fractures after single-level posterior spinal fusion

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Pedicle fractures are a rare but potentially devastating complication of posterior instrumented spinal fusion (PSF). Preoperative awareness of the possible risk factors may help prevent these fractures by modifying the surgical plan. However, the risk factors have not yet been identified.

PURPOSE

To determine the preoperative parameters associated with postoperative L5 pedicle fracture after L4/5 PSF.

STUDY DESIGN

Case control study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Patients undergoing L4/5 PSF at a single academic institution between 2014 and 2020.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Occurrence of postoperative L5 pedicle fracture.

METHODS

Of 253 patients (female:male, 145:108) undergoing L4/5 PSF from 2014 to 2020, patients with postoperative L5 pedicle fractures were identified retrospectively as "cases" (n = 8, all female, age: 70 ± 10.7 years). As a control group all remaining patients with a follow-up of more than 12 months were allocated (n = 184, 104 females, age: 64.27 ± 13.00 years). In all but 16 cases, anterior support with transforaminal or posterior interbody fusion was performed. Demographic and clinical data (body mass index (BMI)), surgical factors, and comorbidities) were compared. Radiological assessment of spinopelvic parameters was performed using pre- and postoperative standing lateral radiographs.

RESULTS

The overall incidence of L5 pedicle fractures after L4/5 spinal fusion was 3.16%, with a median time from index surgery to diagnosis of 25 days (range, 6-199 days) (75% within the first 32 days postoperatively). Patients with L5 pedicle fractures had higher pelvic incidence (PI) (71° ± 9° vs. 56° ± 11°; p=.001), sacral slope (SS) (45° ± 7° vs. 35° ± 8°; p=.002), L5 slope (30° ± 11° vs. 15° ± 10°, p=.001), L5 incidence (42° ± 14° vs. 26° ± 11°; p= .003), L1-S1 lumbar lordosis (LL) postop (57° ± 10° vs. 45° ± 11°; p=.006), and L4 -S1 LL postop (33° ± 7° vs. 28° ± 7°; p=.049) compared with the control group. Pelvic tilt and PI- LL mismatch were not significantly different. Female gender was a significant risk factor for L5 pedicle fractures (p=.015). BMI (kg/m²) was statistically equal in patients with or without pedicle fractures (28.37 ± 5.96 vs. 28.53 ± 16.32; p=.857). There was no significant difference between the groups for approximative bone mineral density assessment (Hounsfield units; 113 ± 60 vs. 120 ± 43; p=.396) using the L3 trabecular region of interest (ROI) measurement. The correlation analysis demonstrated that most of the identified risk factors except for the postoperative L4-S1 lordosis show significant positive associations among each other. All eight patients in the fracture group underwent revision surgery, and the instrumented fusion was extended to the sacrum, with the addition of sacral-alar-iliac or iliac screws, in six cases.

CONCLUSIONS

L5 pedicle fractures occurred in 3% of the patients after single level L4/5 PSF. Risk factors are female gender, higher PI, SS, L5 slope, L5 incidence, and LL postop but not high BMI. These findings can be used for surgical planning and decision of fusion levels.

Early postoperative sacral fracture after short-segment posterior lumbar interbody fusion for L5/S1 isthmic spondylolisthesis: A case report

Background:

Early postoperative sacral fractures are extremely rare complications of single-level posterior lumbar interbody fusions (PLIFs).

Case Description:

A 71-year-old female presented with lower back pain and right S1 radiculopathy attributed to MR-documented L5/S1 isthmic spondylolisthesis. Following a L5 laminectomy and bilateral L5/S1 PLIF, she experienced sacral pain while sitting. When the MR showed a sacral insufficiency fracture with anterolisthesis at L5/S1, a secondary posterior fusion was extended to the pelvis, utilizing bilateral iliac screws. Following this reoperation, the patient did well and went on to achieve arthrodesis.

Conclusion:

Early postoperative sacral fractures that occur following single-segment L5/S1 PLIF for isthmic spondylolisthesis warrant fusion to the pelvis with bilateral iliac screws.

Sacral Insufficiency Fracture Following Short-Segment Lumbosacral Fusion: Case Series and Review of the Literature

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective case series.

OBJECTIVE

Sacral insufficiency fracture is a rare and serious complication following lumbar spine instrumented fusion. The purpose of this study was to describe the patient characteristics, presentation, evaluation, treatment options, and outcomes for patients with sacral insufficiency fracture after short-segment lumbosacral fusion.

METHODS

Six patients from our institutional database and 16 patients from literature review were identified with a sacral insufficiency fracture after short-segment (L4-S1 or L5-S1) lumbar fusion within 1 year of surgery.

RESULTS

Patients were 55% female with a mean age of 58 years and body mass index of 30 kg/m². Osteoporosis or osteopenia was the most common comorbidity (85%). Half of patients sustained a sacral fracture after surgery from a posterior approach, while the others had anterior or anterior-posterior surgery. Mean time to fracture was 42 days with patients clinically presenting with new sacral pain (86%), radiculopathy (60%), or neurologic deficit (5%). Ultimately, 73% of patients underwent operative fixation often involving extension of the construct (75%) and fusion to the pelvis (69%). Men (P = .02) and patients with new radicular pain or neurologic deficit (P = .01) were more likely to undergo revision surgical treatment while women over 50 years of age were more likely to be treated conservatively (P = .003).

CONCLUSIONS

Spine surgeons should monitor for sacral insufficiency fracture as a source of new-onset pain in the postoperative period in patients with a short segment fusion to the sacrum. The recognition of this complication should prompt an assessment of bone health and management of underlying bone fragility.

Sacral insufficiency fracture after instrumented lumbosacral fusion: Focusing pelvic deformation -A retrospective case series

The purpose of this study was to report the characteristics of SIFs after ILSF and discuss its management focusing on pelvic deformation. We retrospectively reviewed all consecutive patients who underwent ILSF for degenerative disc diseases during the period between 2000 and 2017 and were diagnosed as SIF at our institute. The clinical and radiographic data were reviewed on their medical charts. Treatment outcomes for SIF were also investigated. Eight patients (all females) were included in this study. Mean age at SIF diagnosis was 72 years, and the mean follow-up period was 3.8 years (range 1-7 years). SIF developed average 7.5 years (range 1 month-17 years) after the index ILSF. Fracture patterns were unilateral vertical in four, bilateral vertical in three, and horizontal in 1 patient. Unlike patients with unilateral vertical SIF, patients with bilateral vertical or horizontal SIF showed a marked increase of pelvic incidence (PI) by mean 17.0°±5.0° and sagittal vertical axis (SVA) by mean 4.5 ± 2.2 cm, compared to the respective values before the onset of abrupt pain. All patients with unilateral vertical SIF were treated favorably by conservative management, however sacropelvic fixation was inevitable in patients with bilateral vertical or horizontal SIF. Bilateral vertical or horizontal SIF showed marked changes on sagittal radiographic parameters including PI and SVA. Although unilateral vertical SIF has benign courses that responded well to conservative management, bilateral vertical or horizontal SIF is likely to need surgical treatment. Treatment plan should be determined depending on fracture pattern and pelvic deformation.

Regional improvements in lumbosacropelvic Hounsfield units following teriparatide treatment

OBJECTIVE

Opportunistic Hounsfield unit (HU) determination from CT imaging has been increasingly used to estimate bone mineral density (BMD) in conjunction with assessments from dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA). The authors sought to compare the effect of teriparatide on HUs across different regions in the pelvis, sacrum, and lumbar spine, as a surrogate measure for the effects of teriparatide on lumbosacropelvic instrumentation.

METHODS

A single-institution retrospective review of patients who had been treated with at least 6 months of teriparatide was performed. All patients had at least baseline DXA as well as pre- and post-teriparatide CT imaging. HUs were measured in the pedicle, lamina, and vertebral body of the lumbar spine, in the sciatic notch, and at the S1 and S2 levels at three different points (ilium, sacral body, and sacral ala).

RESULTS

Forty patients with an average age of 67 years underwent a mean of 20 months of teriparatide therapy. Mean HUs of the lumbar lamina, pedicles, and vertebral body were significantly different from each other before teriparatide treatment: 343 ± 114, 219 ± 89.2, and 111 ± 48.1, respectively (p < 0.001). Mean HUs at the S1 level for the ilium, sacral ala, and sacral body were also significantly different from each other: 124 ± 90.1, −10.7 ± 61.9, and 99.1 ± 72.1, respectively (p < 0.001). The mean HUs at the S2 level for the ilium and sacral body were not significantly different from each other, although the mean HU at the sacral ala (−11.9 ± 52.6) was significantly lower than those at the ilium and sacral body (p = 0.003 and 0.006, respectively). HU improvement occurred in most regions following teriparatide treatment. In the lumbar spine, the mean lamina HU increased from 343 to 400 (p < 0.001), the mean pedicle HU increased from 219 to 242 (p = 0.04), and the mean vertebral body HU increased from 111 to 134 (p < 0.001). There were also significant increases in the S1 sacral body (99.1 to 130, p < 0.05), S1 ilium (124 vs 165, p = 0.01), S1 sacral ala (−10.7 vs 3.68, p = 0.04), and S2 sacral body (168 vs 189, p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

There was significant regional variation in lumbar and sacropelvic HUs, with most regions significantly increasing following teriparatide treatment. The sacropelvic area had lower HU values than the lumbar spine, more regional variation, and a higher degree of correlation with BMD as measured on DXA. While teriparatide treatment resulted in HUs > 110 in the majority of the lumbosacral spine, the HUs in the sacral ala remained suggestive of severe osteoporosis, which may limit the effectiveness of fixation in this region.

Sacral insufficiency fractures after lumbosacral arthrodesis: salvage lumbopelvic fixation and a proposed management algorithm

OBJECTIVE

Sacral insufficiency fracture after lumbosacral (LS) arthrodesis is an uncommon complication. The objective of this study was to report the authors' operative experience managing this complication, review pertinent literature, and propose a treatment algorithm.

METHODS

The authors analyzed consecutive adult patients treated at their institution from 2009 to 2018. Patients who underwent surgery for sacral insufficiency fractures after posterior instrumented LS arthrodesis were included. PubMed was queried to identify relevant articles detailing management of this complication.

RESULTS

Nine patients with a minimum 6-month follow-up were included (mean age 73 ± 6 years, BMI 30 ± 6 kg/m2, 56% women, mean follow-up 35 months, range 8-96 months). Six patients had osteopenia/osteoporosis (mean dual energy x-ray absorptiometry hip T-score -1.6 ± 0.5) and 3 received treatment. Index LS arthrodesis was performed for spinal stenosis (n = 6), proximal junctional kyphosis (n = 2), degenerative scoliosis (n = 1), and high-grade spondylolisthesis (n = 1). Presenting symptoms of back/leg pain (n = 9) or lower extremity weakness (n = 3) most commonly occurred within 4 weeks of index LS arthrodesis, which prompted CT for fracture diagnosis at a mean of 6 weeks postoperatively. All sacral fractures were adjacent or involved S1 screws and traversed the spinal canal (Denis zone III). H-, U-, or T-type sacral fracture morphology was identified in 7 patients. Most fractures (n = 8) were Roy-Camille type II (anterior displacement with kyphosis). All patients underwent lumbopelvic fixation via a posterior-only approach; mean operative duration and blood loss were 3.3 hours and 850 ml, respectively. Bilateral dual iliac screws were utilized in 8 patients. Back/leg pain and weakness improved postoperatively. Mean sacral fracture anterolisthesis and kyphotic angulation improved (from 8 mm/11° to 4 mm/5°, respectively) and all fractures were healed on radiographic follow-up (mean duration 29 months, range 8-90 months). Two patients underwent revision for rod fractures at 1 and 2 years postoperatively. A literature review found 17 studies describing 87 cases; potential risk factors were osteoporosis, longer fusions, high pelvic incidence (PI), and postoperative PI-to-lumbar lordosis (LL) mismatch.

CONCLUSIONS

A high index of suspicion is needed to diagnose sacral insufficiency fracture after LS arthrodesis. A trial of conservative management is reasonable for select patients; potential surgical indications include refractory pain, neurological deficit, fracture nonunion with anterolisthesis or kyphotic angulation, L5-S1 pseudarthrosis, and spinopelvic malalignment. Lumbopelvic fixation with iliac screws may be effective salvage treatment to allow fracture healing and symptom improvement. High-risk patients may benefit from prophylactic lumbopelvic fixation at the time of index LS arthrodesis.

A Case Series That Supports the Application of the S2AI Technique for Fractures and Failures After Lumbosacral Fusion

BACKGROUND

Sacral fractures and failures are uncommon after lumbosacral fusion but have received increasing attention in the surgical literature. They can be difficult to diagnose, making timely treatment difficult. No consensus has been reached on the characteristics of these complications or on optimal treatment.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

The goal of this retrospective case series is to contribute additional cases of these uncommon complications of lumbosacral fusion to the surgical literature to help clinicians to anticipate, diagnose, characterize, manage, and treat sacral fractures and failures after lumbosacral fusion.

METHODS

The medical records of five patients who experienced a sacral fracture or failure after lumbosacral fusion between January 2012 and November 2017 were identified and reviewed retrospectively. Records were reviewed for age, sex, clinical presentation, previous management, outpatient clinical records, imaging, and post-operative course.

RESULTS

Four patients in the series experienced a sacral fracture and one experienced hardware failure. All patients presented with elevated pain and underwent revision surgery. Radiographic detection of the fracture or failure occurred at a mean of 11.2 weeks (range, 3 to 24 weeks) after initial surgery, and the mean age of patients was 68.2 years (range, 63 to 80 years). Of the five patients, four were female; two had been diagnosed with osteoporosis and two with osteopenia. In our case series, the S2-alar-iliac (S2AI) technique was used with success in all five cases.

CONCLUSION

Fractures and failures after lumbosacral fusion can be difficult to diagnose because of delayed presentation, nonspecific presenting symptoms, and a lack of identifiable mechanism. A high index of suspicion is required to detect these uncommon complications, and patients have responded well to both conservative and surgical treatments.

Factors Impacting Outcomes and Health Care Utilization in Osteoporotic Patients Undergoing Lumbar Spine Fusions: A MarketScan Database Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To identify factors impacting long-term complications, reoperations, readmission rates, and health care utilization in patients with osteoporosis (OP) following lumbar fusions.

METHODS

We used International Classification of Disease, Ninth Revision, International Classification of Disease, Tenth Revision , and Current Procedural Terminology codes to extract data from MarketScan (2000-2016). Patients undergoing lumbar spine fusion were divided into 2 groups based on preoperative diagnosis: OP or non-OP. We used multivariable generalized linear regression models to analyze outcomes of interest (reoperation rates, readmissions, complications, health care utilization) at 1, 6, 12, and 24 months after discharge.

RESULTS

MarketScan identified 116,749 patients who underwent lumbar fusion with ≥24 months of follow-up; 6% had OP. OP patients had a higher incidence of complications (14% vs. 9%); were less likely to be discharged home (77% vs. 86%, P < 0.05); had more new fusions or refusions at 6 months (2.9% vs. 2.1%), 12 months (5% vs. 3.8%), and 24 months (8.5% vs. 7.4%); incurred more outpatient services at 12 months (80 vs. 61) and 24 months (148 vs. 115); and incurred higher overall costs at 12 months ($22,932 vs. $17,017) and 24 months ($48,379 vs. $35,888). Elderly OP patients (>65 years old) who underwent multilevel lumbar fusions had longer hospitalization, had higher complication rates, and incurred lower costs at 6, 12, and 24 months compared with young non-OP patients who underwent single-level lumbar fusion.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients of all ages with OP had higher complication rates and required revision surgeries at 6, 12, and 24 months compared with non-OP patients. Elderly OP patients having multilevel lumbar fusions were twice as likely to have complications and lower health care utilization compared with younger non-OP patients who underwent single-level fusion.

Diagnosis, Risk Factors, and Management of Sacral and Pelvic Fractures After Instrumented Lumbar Fusions: A Systematic Review

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic literature review.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate risk factors, diagnosis, and management of sacral and pelvic fractures (SPFs) after instrumented fusions.

METHODS

A systematic review following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines was performed using the PubMed database. Articles with patients with an SPF after a lumbar instrumented fusion were included. The articles addressing specifically proximal junctional kyphosis were excluded. Eleven small cases series (level of evidence IV) were reviewed.

RESULTS

The incidence of SPF was 1.86% in one study. The risk factors reported were elderly patients, multilevel surgery, long fusions stopping at L5 or S1 instead of the ilium, osteoporosis, obesity, and sagittal imbalance. Computed tomography scan was the preferential image modality for diagnosing. Nonsurgical treatment may be used in patients with tolerable pain and nondisplaced fracture. Persistent pain was an indication for surgery, as well as fracture displacement. The most common surgical treatment reported was an extension of the fusion to the iliac using iliac screws.

CONCLUSION

SPFs after lumbar instrumented fusion are rare but clinically meaningful complications. The risk factors, diagnosis, and management of SPFs are described in our review.

A Review and Clinical Perspective of the Impact of Osteoporosis on the Spine

Introduction

Osteopenia and osteoporosis are common conditions in the United States. The health consequences of low bone density can be dire, from poor surgical outcomes to increased mortality rates following a fracture.

Significance

This article highlights the impact low bone density has on spine health in terms of vertebral fragility fractures and its adverse effects on elective spine surgery. It also reviews the clinical importance of bone health assessment and optimization.

Results

Vertebral fractures are the most common fragility fractures with significant consequences related to patient morbidity and mortality. Additionally, a vertebral fracture is the best predictor of a subsequent fracture. These fractures constitute sentinel events in osteoporosis that require further evaluation and treatment of the patient's underlying bone disease. In addition to fractures, osteopenia and osteoporosis have deleterious effects on elective spine surgery from screw pullout to fusion rates. Adequate evaluation and treatment of a patient's underlying bone disease in these situations have been shown to improve patient outcomes.

Conclusion

With an increased understanding of the prevalence of low bone mass and its consequences as well an understanding of how to identify these patients and appropriately intervene, spine surgeons can effectively decrease the rates of adverse health outcomes related to low bone mass.

BMI and gender increase risk of sacral fractures after multilevel instrumented spinal fusion compared with bone mineral density and pelvic parameters

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Sacral fractures are a rare but potentially devastating complication. Long-fusion constructs, including the sacrum, that do not extend to the pelvis may result in sacral fractures. Besides established risk factors including gender, age, and number of levels fused, body mass index (BMI), pelvic parameters, and bone mineral density (BMD) have also been proposed as potential risk factors for postoperative sacral fractures. The literature supporting this, however, is limited.

PURPOSE

The aim of the present study was to assess whether preoperative pelvic parameters, BMI, or BMD of patients with sacral fracture are different compared with age, gender, and fusion level-matched non-fracture controls.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

This is a case-control study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Patients undergoing posterior instrumented fusion at a single academic institution between 2002 and 2016 were included in the study.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The outcome measure was occurrence of a postoperative sacral fracture.

METHODS

Patients with sacral fractures after posterior instrumented spinal fusion, including the sacrum, were retrospectively identified and matched 2:1 with non-fracture controls based on gender, age, and number of levels fused. Patients with concurrent spinopelvic fixation or missing preoperative computed tomography (CT) imaging were excluded. Preoperative sagittal balance was assessed using lateral radiographs. Quantitative computed tomography (QCT) assessment included standard measurements at L1/L2 and additional experimental measurements of the S1 body and sacral ala.

RESULTS

Twenty-one patients with sacral fracture were matched to non-fracture controls. The majority of the patients with sacral fracture was female (76.2%) and of advanced age (mean 66.4 years). Fracture and control groups were well matched with respect to gender, age, and number of levels fused. Standard measurements at L1/L2 showed no significant difference in BMD between the fracture and the control groups (109.9 mg/cm³ vs. 116.4 mg/cm³, p=.414). Similarly, there was no significant BMD differences between the groups using the experimental measurements of the S1 body (183.6 mg/cm³ vs. 176.2 mg/cm³, p=.567) and the sacral ala (8.9 mg/cm³ vs. 4.8 mg/cm³, p=.616). Mean preoperative pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch and pelvic tilt were not significantly different between the groups. Univariate conditional logistic regression analysis revealed that the odds of experiencing a sacral fracture was approximately six times higher for obese patients compared with normal or underweight patients. After controlling for BMI in multivariate conditional logistic regression models, BMD was still not significantly associated with the odds of experiencing sacral fractures.

CONCLUSIONS

To our knowledge, this is the first study to assess the association of preoperative BMD measured by QCT, pelvic parameters, and BMI with postoperative sacral fractures in a large patient cohort. Interestingly, our data do not show any difference in preoperative pelvic parameters and BMD between the groups. This is in line with previous reports that indicate only a few patients with sacral fracture after fusion surgery have clear evidence of osteoporosis. Bone mineral density as a measure of bone quantity, rather than bone quality, may not be as important in these fractures as previously thought. Obesity, however, was associated with higher odds of experiencing postoperative sacral fractures. The present study thereby challenges the widespread concept that obesity is a protective factor against fractures in the elderly. In summary, our results suggest that BMI and gender, more than pelvic parameters and BMD, are risk factors for postoperative sacral fractures.

S2 Alar Iliac Fixation in Long Segment Constructs, a Two- to Five-Year Follow-up

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective review of patients having undergone S2 alar-iliac (S2AI) fixation for long fusions with a minimum two-year follow-up.

OBJECTIVES

To report on fusion rates, complications, technique-specific complications of patients having undergone S2AI fixation.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Sacropelvic fixation continues to be a challenge when performing long fusions to the pelvis. S2AI screws have been found to provide solid biomechanical fixation and have been found to have good clinical results in short-term follow-up for pediatric and adult patients.

METHODS

Cases were retrospectively reviewed in patients who had placement of S2AI screws for long fusions with at least a two-year follow-up. Demographic data, complications, and reoperations were reviewed. Complications were broken into minor and major categories similar to previous series on pelvic fixation.

RESULTS

There were 86 cases identified. Minor and major complications occurred in 29% and 24% of patients, respectively, with the majority of minor complications being intraoperative dural tears. Revision surgery for all causes was performed in 23% of the cohort. Fusion rate at L5-S1 for patients without preoperative pseudarthrosis was 95.3%. Preoperative L5-S1 pseudoarthrosis was identified in 20 patients, 17 (95%) of these went onto fusion after one surgery. There was evidence of S2AI screw lucency in 10.4% of cases. However, the majority of these were asymptomatic.

CONCLUSIONS

Sacropelvic fixation using the S2AI technique provides safe, durable fixation with low rates of technique-specific complications and limited need for hardware removal. Complication rates in this series were similar to other series on long fusions to the pelvis. Additionally, fusion rates were high at L5-S1 for both patients with and without preoperative L5-S1 pseudarthrosis. It appears that the S2AI technique is a powerful option for patients with previous L5-S1 pseudarthrosis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Sacral stress fracture after lumbar and lumbosacral fusion. How to manage it? A proposition based on three cases and literature review

Sacral fracture after lumbosacral instrumentation could be a source of prolonged pain and a late autonomy recovery in old patients. Diagnosis remains difficult and usually delayed. No clear consensus for efficient treatment of this complication has been defined. Aim of this study was to determine how to manage them. Three patients who sustained sacral fracture after instrumented lumbosacral fusion performed for degenerative disease of the spine are discussed. History, physical examinations' findings and radiographic features are presented. Pertinent literature was analyzed. All patients complained of unspecific low back and buttock pain a few weeks after index surgery. Diagnosis was done on CT-scan. We always choose revision surgery with good functional results. Sacral stress fracture has to be reminded behind unspecific buttock or low back pain. CT-scan seems to be the best radiological test to do the diagnosis. Surgical treatment is recommended when lumbar lordosis and pelvic incidence mismatched.

Comprehensive classification of fragility fractures of the pelvic ring: Recommendations for surgical treatment

Due to the increasing life expectancy, orthopaedic surgeons are more and more often confronted with fragility fractures of the pelvis (FFPs). These kinds of fractures are the result of a low-energy impact or they may even occur spontaneously in patients with severe osteoporosis. Due to some distinct differences, the established classifications for pelvic ring lesions in younger adults do not fully reflect the clinical and morphological criteria of FFPs. Most FFPs are minimally displaced and do not require surgical therapy. However, in some patients, an insidious progress of bone damage leads to increasing displacement, nonunion and persisting instability. Therefore, new concepts for surgical treatment have to be developed to address the functional needs of the elderly patients. Based on an analysis of 245 consecutive patients with FFPs, we propose a novel classification system for this condition. This classification is based on morphological criteria and it corresponds with the degree of instability. Also in the elderly, these criteria are the most important for the decision on the type of treatment as well as type and extent of surgery. The estimation of the degree of instability is based on radiological and clinical findings. The classification gives also hints for treatment strategies, which may vary between minimally invasive techniques and complex surgical reconstructions.

Incidence, diagnosis, and management of sacral fractures following multilevel spinal arthrodesis

BACKGROUND

Fractures of the sacrum are a rare complication following instrumented spinal fusion, with only 34 cases previously reported in the literature. Previous series have generally been limited to less than five cases.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to determine the incidence of sacral fractures caudal to instrumented spinal fusion constructs, identify risk factors for fracture and for failure of conservative management, and describe strategies for surgical treatment of these fractures.

STUDY DESIGN

This is a retrospective review.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Patients undergoing instrumented posterior spinal arthrodesis between 2002 and 2011 were included in the sample.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Clinical and radiographic data from hospital and surgeon records comprise outcome measures.

METHODS

Methods include a review of clinical and radiographic data from a prospectively collected patient database recording all adjacent segment fractures during the study period.

RESULTS

Twenty-four patients developed sacral fractures caudal to instrumented spinal fusion constructs during the study period. The overall incidence was 6.1% and was significantly greater in fusions greater than four levels (14.5%). The mean time from index surgery to fracture was 4.3 months. Only one fracture was evident on plain radiography at the onset of symptoms. Computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and nuclear scintigraphy can all be used to establish the diagnosis. Eight patients were successfully treated conservatively. The mean time to fracture union was 21 weeks. Anterolisthesis of the fracture greater than 2 mm and kyphotic angulation were significantly associated with failure of conservative management. Surgical intervention included posterior extension of the fusion construct to S2 and the iliac wings with sacroiliac joint fusion. In 10 cases, a combined anterior and posterior approach was used that consisted of either revision anterior lumbar interbody fusion or transsacral posterior lumbar interbody fusion.

CONCLUSIONS

Sacral fractures following instrumented posterior spinal fusion are an uncommon complication; that is often unrecognized on plain radiographs. Risk factors include osteoporosis and long spinal fusions. Anterolisthesis and kyphosis of the fracture is associated with failure of conservative management.

Sacral fracture after instrumented lumbosacral fusion: analysis of risk factors from spinopelvic parameters

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective comparative study.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the incidence and characteristics of key spinopelvic parameters that are correlated with sacral fracture development after lumbosacral fusion.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Sacral fracture is a possible complication of instrumented lumbosacral fusion and this has recently been documented in the literature. Preoperative awareness of risk factors concerning spinopelvic parameters and sacral fracture may aid in surgical planning to prevent its occurrence.

METHODS

All patients who underwent instrumented lumbosacral fusion from L2 or above, between 2010 and 2011 at Gakkentoshi Hospital, were included.

RESULTS

A total of 116 patients (47 men and 69 women) were evaluated in this study. Average age at surgery was 71 years, and the average follow-up period was 19 months. The average number of fixed segments was 5, and the average time interval between index surgery and sacral fracture development was 42 days. Notably, sacral fractures were identified in 5 patients (4.3%), all of whom were women. We, therefore, compared the 2 groups of female patients (fracture group, n = 5 vs. nonfracture group, n = 64). The fracture group had a substantially higher mean pelvic incidence (PI) than the nonfracture group (72° ± 8° vs. 51° ± 12°, respectively, P < 0.01). The fracture group also had a larger postoperative lumbar lordosis (LL)-PI mismatch than the nonfracture group (-26° ± 7° vs. -7° ± 18°, respectively, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

The current review of our patients informs appropriate preoperative planning in cases involving lumbosacral fusion for postmenopausal women with a high PI. Surgeons should plan to achieve large increases in LL to restore not only spinopelvic harmony but also to avoid postoperative sacral fracture. For such patients, because it is difficult to consistently achieve a sufficiently large LL, we recommend prophylactic iliosacral fixation to protect the sacrum.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

Should symptomatic iliac screws be electively removed in adult spinal deformity patients fused to the sacrum?

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective, single-institution review of adult deformity patients who underwent iliac screw (IS) removal placed during fusion to the sacrum.

OBJECTIVE

To demonstrate whether IS removal offered benefit in terms of hip/buttock pain overlying the IS and whether IS could be removed without significant complications.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

ISs are effective at countering cantilever forces imparted on sacral pedicle screws. Despite the efficacy of IS fixation, pain or implant prominence can lead to elective IS removal. There has been no study about IS removal in adult spinal deformity patients.

METHODS

A total of 395 consecutive walking adult spinal deformity patients fused to the sacrum with IS fixation and minimum 2-year follow-up met study inclusion criteria. Clinical/radiographical data were analyzed. Because there is no validated pain outcomes instrument specific to this situation, an 8-question IS removal questionnaire was designed and used for the sole purpose of this inquiry, within which a universally accepted numeric rating scale for pain was included. RESULTS.: Twenty-four of 395 (6.1%) patients (2 men and 22 women) with mean age of 50.5 ± 10.8 years underwent elective IS removal at mean 2.6 ± 1.3 years from index surgery. Mean follow-up from initial surgery was 6.3 ± 4.0 years. Symptoms included hip/buttock pain in all 24 patients and IS prominence in 5 patients (20.8%). Screw removal was bilateral in 18 (75%) patients and unilateral in 6 (25%) patients. Using a numeric rating pain scale (0-10), hip/buttock pain improved after IS removal: preoperative 6.9 ± 1.8, postoperative 2.0 ± 2.7 (P < 0.05). Patients reported hip/buttock symptoms post-IS removal as "much improved" (78.3%), "somewhat improved" (8.7%), and "unchanged" (13.0%). Two of 24 (8.3%) patients sustained complications from IS removal (wound infection, n = 1; coronal/sagittal imbalance, n = 1). Presented with the same set of circumstances, 22 of 24 (91.7%) patients would have their IS removed again, including one of the patients who had a complication.

CONCLUSION

Of 395 consecutive walking patients who had ISs placed during fusion to the sacrum for adult spinal deformity, 24 (6.1%) underwent elective removal. Patients had a statistically significant improvement in hip/buttock pain after IS removal, and a low prevalence of complications after the procedure was observed.

[Importance of sagittal alignment in spinal revision surgery]

Ignoring the sagittal profile in primary spinal fusion surgery is a common reason for revision surgery. Therefore, it is important that in cases of spinal revision surgery the sagittal alignment is realized. The physiological alignment of the instrumented spine should also indirectly influence the profile of the non-stabilized spine cranial and caudal to the fusion. Patients with normal C7 plumb-line and a physiological sacral inclination have a lower incidence of adjacent segment degeneration. Sagittal imbalance after revision surgery is a risk factor for recurrent pseudarthrosis. In cases of pseudarthrosis a combined approach may be more effective in realizing sagittal balance und enhancing rates of fusion.

Sacral fractures after lumbosacral fusion: a characteristic fracture pattern

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to describe the radiologic pattern of sacral fractures after lumbosacral fusion and to identify clinical characteristics relevant to the radiologic diagnosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A search of CT, nuclear medicine, and MRI radiology reports over a 5-year period at our institution revealed a total of 23 patients with sacral fractures after lumbosacral fusion. Two radiologists reviewed all of the images to determine the sacral fracture pattern. The clinical records of these patients were reviewed for interval after surgery, fusion length, hardware, approach, preoperative diagnosis, symptoms, treatment, and risk factors.

RESULTS

All 23 sacral fractures were horizontal through the sacral body, involved the screw holes, and exited through the posterosuperior sacral alae. The fractures occurred within 3 months of fusion in 19 of 23 patients. All 23 patients had symptoms at the time of fracture. Seventeen of 23 fusions were long (more than four vertebrae). Four of 23 patients had osteoporosis. Eleven of 23 fractures healed without surgery, and 12 were managed with transiliac fixation.

CONCLUSION

Sacral fractures after lumbosacral fusion have a characteristic transverse pattern through the sacral screw holes that differs from the configuration of more common sacral insufficiency fractures. Most of these fractures occur within 3 months after surgery, and many of the patients need additional surgical fixation. Because few of the patients had osteoporosis and most underwent long fusion, the fractures might have been caused by hardware-related stress raisers in the sacrum.

The effect of sacral decortication on lumbosacral fixation in a calf spine model

STUDY DESIGN

Animal cadaveric biomechanical study.

OBJECTIVE

We hypothesized that increasing bony destabilization of a bovine cadaveric sacrum by anterior pedicle screw penetration and bilateral alar decortication would decrease the amount of load necessary for failure of the construct and result in failure through the decortication sites.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Fusion to the sacrum has become commonly used for treatment of neuromuscular scoliosis and fusions in osteoporotic patients. Fixation failure after attempted fusion to the sacrum may be attributed to iatrogenic causes such as S1 screw penetration and sacral ala decortication.

METHODS

Sixteen fresh-frozen 6- to 8-week-old calf spines were tested after instrumentation with pedicle screws and bilateral rods from L2 to S1 using four constructs: (1) S1 screws with posterior-only purchase; (2) S1 screws with bicortical purchase; (3) S1 screws with bicortical purchase and sacral alar decortication; and (4) S1 screws with bicortical purchase, decortication, and iliac fixation. A destructive flexural bending load was applied at L2 to each construct. Ultimate failure moment (Nm) was compared among the four groups, using a one-way analysis of variance combined with Holm-Sidak post hoc test.

RESULTS

No significant difference in failure moment was found among groups 1, 2, and 3. The addition of iliac fixation (group 4) significantly increased bending load to failure (P < 0.01), and iliac screw dislodgement was the dominant mechanism of failure. All specimens in group 3 failed with fractures extending through the decortication site. Groups 1 and 2 specimens failed by fracturing through the S1 body.

CONCLUSION

Sacral alar decortication and anterior pedicle screw purchase did not decrease the failure moment in long instrumentation to the sacrum. Pattern of failure was affected, with alar decortication being the site of fracture in each construct in which it was performed. Iliac fixation increased the failure moment under catastrophic loading conditions even when combined with sacral alar decortication and bicortical pedicle screw purchase.

Sacral stress fracture in a professional hockey player: a case report

Lumbosacral pain is common in the general population and among athletes. Many athletes are diagnosed with low back strain and treated with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatories, rest, and muscle relaxers. However, the differential for low back pain in athletes is broad and includes many potential etiologies such as: lumbar disk disease, facet arthropathy, spondylolysis, sacroiliitis, tendinopathies, ligament sprains, hip pathology, bursitis, intraabdominal processes, and neoplasm. Sacral stress fractures are included among the many possibilities. Stress fractures are rare in the general population, with a <1% incidence over a lifetime, but up to 20% of runners may experience a stress fracture while participating in their sport. Athletes are unique as they engage in prolonged strenuous activities, both in practice and competition. Sports activities have the potential of placing extreme amounts of repetitive loading on bones, articular surfaces, and soft tissues throughout the body, including the sacrum. Hockey players place considerable demands on their pelvis during training and competition given the physical demands of the sport. This article presents a case of a delayed diagnosis of a sacral stress fracture in a professional hockey player. This is the first known report of a hockey-related sacral stress fracture.