A comparison of three different surgery approaches and methods for neurologically intact thoracolumbar fractures: a retrospective study

Percutaneous versus traditional open approaches for the treatment of thoracolumbar fractures in patients without neurologic deficits: a meta-analysis of 35 cohort studies

At present, percutaneous surgery is widely used to treat thoracolumbar fractures. However, the actual safety, feasibility, and effectiveness of percutaneous surgery are not clear. Through systematic review and meta-analysis, we compared the efficacies of percutaneous pedicle screw fixation and open pedicle screw fixation in the treatment of thoracolumbar fractures without nerve root symptoms. We systematically searched the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane libraries for articles published on or before June 2023. All results were evaluated by standard methods recommended for meta-analysis, continuous data were expressed by standard mean differences (SMDs), and binary variables were analyzed by odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). We also explored the main sources of heterogeneity and the stability of the results through sensitivity analysis, Begg's funnel plots, and Egger's test. Thirty-five cohort studies with a total of 3039 patients were included. The study found that patients who undergo percutaneous approaches have less intraoperative blood loss (IBL), shorter length of hospital stay (LOS), shorter operation time, and shorter incision. Moreover, percutaneous approaches had more advantages in terms of visual analog scale (VAS) scores, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores, and infection rates. However, there was no significant difference in anterior vertebral body height (AVB), Cobb angle (CA), or screw errors between the two groups. In the long run, the clinical and surgical results of the percutaneous approach are better than those of the open approach, but the radiological results of both operations do not seem to show an advantage for any specific approach. Because of publication bias and heterogeneity, our findings must be interpreted with caution. However, this paper will provide some support for clinicians to choose suitable surgical methods for the treatment of thoracolumbar fractures.

Postoperative loss of correction after combined posterior and anterior spinal fusion surgeries in a lumbar burst fracture patient with Class II obesity

Background:

When treating thoracolumbar fractures with severe cranial endplate injury but no or slight caudal endplate injury, it is debatable whether anterior fusion should be performed only for the injured cranial level, or for both cranial and caudal levels. We report an unexpected postoperative correction loss after combined multilevel posterior and single-level anterior fusion surgery in a patient with obesity.

Case Description:

A 28-year-old male with Class II obesity was brought to the emergency room with an L1 burst fracture with spinal canal involvement. Cranial endplate injury was severe, whereas caudal endplate injury was mild. The first surgery with 1-above 1-below posterior fixation failed to achieve sufficient stability; thus, additional surgeries (3-above 3-below posterior fixation and single-level T12-L1 anterior fusion) were performed. Postoperatively, the local kyphosis angle (LKA) between T12 and L2 was 22° in the lateral lying position and 29° in the standing position. Twenty-one-month post surgery, bony fusion between T12 and L1 was observed, and the LKA was 28° in both the lateral lying and standing positions. After posterior implants were removed 24 months after the surgery, significant correction loss both at the T12-L1 segment (6°) and L1-L2 segment (6°) occurred, and LKA was 40° at the final follow-up.

Conclusion:

In this patient, an intense axial load due to excessive body weight was at least one of the causes of postoperative correction loss. Postural differences in LKA may be useful to evaluate the stability of thoracolumbar fractures after fusion surgery and to predict postoperative correction loss.

The Mini-Open Wiltse Approach with Pedicle Screw Fixation Versus Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Fixation for Treatment of Neurologically Intact Thoracolumbar Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of the present study was to compare the clinical outcomes and complications between the mini-open Wiltse approach with pedicle screw fixation (MWPSF) and percutaneous pedicle screw fixation (PPSF) in treating neurologically intact thoracolumbar fractures.

METHODS

We comprehensively searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Library and performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials and retrospective comparative studies assessing these important indexes of the 2 methods using Review Manager, version 5.4. The clinical outcomes are presented as the risk difference for dichotomous outcomes and the mean difference for continuous outcomes with the 95% confidence intervals. Heterogeneity was assessed using the χ² test and I² statistics. The study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD 42021290078).

RESULTS

Two randomized controlled trials and six retrospective cohort studies were included in the present analysis. The percutaneous approach was associated with less intraoperative blood loss compared with the mini-open Wiltse approach. No significant differences were found in the total length of the incisions, hospitalization time, postoperative visual analog scale scores, postoperative Oswestry disability index, postoperative Cobb angle, postoperative Cobb angle correction, postoperative Cobb angle correction loss, accuracy rate of pedicle screw placement, and postoperative complications between MWPSF and PPSF. However, the incidence of facet joint violation was significantly higher in the PPSF group. In addition, MWPSF was associated with a shorter operative time, shorter intraoperative fluoroscopy time, lower hospitalization costs, better postoperative vertebral body angle and percentage of vertebral body height compared with PPSF.

CONCLUSIONS

Both MWPSF and PPSF are safe and effective treatments of neurologically intact thoracolumbar fractures. Nevertheless, our results have indicated that MWPSF might be the better choice, because it has a shorter learning curve and decreased facet joint violation, operative time, hospitalization costs, and radiation exposure. In addition, MWPSF was associated with better improvement of the postoperative vertebral body angle and percentage of vertebral body height.

Finite element study on whether posterior upper wall fracture is a risk factor for the failure of short-segment pedicle screw fixation in the treatment of L1 burst fracture

PURPOSE

To establish the finite element model of T12 and L2 (T12-L2) pedicle screw fixation for severe L1 burst fracture, and quantitatively simulate and analyze the screw stress and vertebral displacement in different degrees of L1 posterior upper wall fracture (PUWF), and evaluate whether PUWF degree is a risk factor for fixation failure.

METHODS

The data of 6 healthy volunteers were used to establish a finite element model of T12-L2 pedicle screw fixation for type A severe burst fractures. The stress and displacement of the conventional and Schanz pedicle screws for the different degrees of PUWF (including the anterior upper wall of the vertebral canal and the bipedicle) were evaluated.

RESULTS

The maximum stress and L1 displacement of conventional and Schanz pedicle screws were positively correlated with the severity of the PUWF (P<0.05). During anterior flexion, the maximum stress of conventional pedicle screws for 70% type I were 538.3±59.75MPa and the maximum stress of Schanz pedicle screws for 90% type Ⅱ, 90% type Ⅲ and 70% type IV fractures were close to the fatigue threshold. The maximum stress during anterior flexion were significantly higher than those during posterior extension, bending and rotation (P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

The posterior upper wall fracture of vertebral body (VB) of type A burst fracture is not an independent risk factor for the failure of short-segment pedicle screw fixation (SSPSF). Anterior flexion of type A fractures combined with severe PUWF of VB was a risk factor for the failure of SSPSF.