Less Invasive Surgery is Feasible in the Management of Traumatic Thoracolumbar Fractures in Isolated and Polytrauma Injury

Surgical treatment of traumatic fractures of the thoracic and lumbar spine: A systematic review

Introduction

The treatment of traumatic thoracic and lumbar spine fractures remains controversial. To date no consensus exists on the correct choice of surgical approach and technique.

Research question

to provide a comprehensive up-to-date overview of the available different surgical methods and their quantified outcomes.

Methods

PubMed and EMBASE were searched between 2001 and 2020 using the term 'spinal fractures'. Inclusion criteria were: adults, ≥10 cases, ≥12 months follow-up, thoracic or lumbar fractures, and surgery <3 weeks of trauma. Studies were categorized per surgical technique: Posterior open (PO), posterior percutaneous (PP), stand-alone vertebral body augmentation (SA), anterior scopic (AS), anterior open (AO), posterior percutaneous and anterior open (PPAO), posterior percutaneous and anterior scopic (PPAS), posterior open and anterior open (POAO) and posterior open and anterior scopic (POAS). The PO group was used as a reference group.

Results

After duplicate removal 6042 articles were identified. A total of 102 articles were Included, in which 137 separate surgical technique cohorts were described: PO (n = 75), PP, (n = 39), SA (n = 12), AO (n = 5), PPAO (n = 1), PPAS (n = 1), POAO (n = 2) and POAS (n = 2).

Discussion and conclusion

For type A3/A4 burst fractures, without severe neurological deficit, posterior percutaneous (PP) technique seems the safest and most feasible option in the past two decades. If needed, PP can be combined with anterior augmentation to prevent secondary kyphosis. Furthermore, posterior open (PO) technique is feasible in almost all types of fractures. Also, this technique can provide for an additional posterior decompression or fusion. Overall, no neurologic deterioration was reported following surgical intervention.

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.