Surgical and clinical efficacy of sacroiliac joint fusion: a systematic review of the literature

Sacroiliac joint dysfunction: anatomy, pathophysiology, differential diagnosis, and treatment approaches

The sacroiliac joints (SIJ) play a pivotal role in pelvic stability and load transmission. SIJ-related disorders can pose a diagnostic challenge because of complex anatomy, non-specific imaging findings, and overlapping symptomatology with other lower back conditions. Broadly, SIJ pathology can be divided into the following categories: infectious, inflammatory, degenerative, mechanical, traumatic, and neoplastic. On the spectrum of mechanical disorders is the entity of SIJ dysfunction, defined as pain localized to the SIJ due to non-inflammatory causes. This paper aims to enhance the understanding of SIJ dysfunction by exploring SIJ anatomy, pathophysiology, and differential diagnosis for SIJ pain. Etiologies, associations, and diagnostic physical examination maneuvers for SIJ dysfunction are reviewed. We will discuss the role of diagnostic imaging in SIJ dysfunction and propose imaging findings which may indicate the diagnosis. Finally, we will discuss therapeutic strategies to treat SIJ dysfunction. By delving into the complexities of SIJ anatomy and pathophysiology, this paper provides valuable discernment for the diagnosis and management of SIJ-related disorders.

Minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion secondary to lumbosacral fusion: Clinical and functional results at 2years of follow-up

INTRODUCTION

Degenerative sacroiliac (SI) joint syndrome is known to be more common after lumbosacral fusion. While this diagnosis is suspected based on various clinical criteria and diagnostic tests, it is confirmed with a diagnostic nerve block. If conservative treatment fails, SI joint fusion through a minimally invasive approach is a useful palliative approach for patients at a treatment crossroads. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical and functional results at 2years postoperative after minimally invasive SI joint fusion in patients with SI joint syndrome following lumbosacral fusion.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We carried out a single-center retrospective study of patients operated between June 2017 and October 2020. Included were patients who had a confirmed diagnosis of SI joint syndrome after lumbosacral fusion surgery, who underwent SI joint fusion and had at least 2years' follow-up. The primary outcome was the improvement in lumbar and radicular pain on a numerical rating scale (NRS). The secondary outcomes were the functional scores (Oswestry and SF-12) along with the level of patient satisfaction. Our study population consisted of 54 patients (41 women, 13 men) with a mean age of 59years (27-88). Thirty-one of these patients were operated on both sides (85 fusions in all). The patients had undergone a mean of 3 lumbar surgeries (1-7) before the SI fusion.

RESULTS

The lumbar and radicular NRS were 8.4 (7-10) and 5.1 (2-10) preoperatively and 5.2 (0-8) and 3.0 (0-8) at 2years postoperatively, which was a reduction of 37% and 42% (p<0.001), respectively. The Oswestry score went from 69.4 (52-86) preoperatively to 45.6 (29-70) at 2years, which was a 33% improvement (p<0.001). Eighty-six percent of patients were satisfied or very satisfied with the surgery.

DISCUSSION

After minimally invasive SI joint fusion, the patients in this study had clear clinical and functional improvements. Previous publications analyzing the results of SI joint fusion found even more improvement, but those patients were relatively heterogenous; in our study, only patients who had a history of lumbosacral fusion were included.

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive SI joint fusion helped patients who developed SI joint syndrome after lumbosacral fusion to improve clinically and functionally.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, retrospective study.

Utility of minimally invasive percutaneous arthrodesis of the sacroiliac joint for the treatment of low back pain: systematic review of the literature

BACKGROUND

The surprising increase observed in recent years in the use of minimally invasive sacroiliac joint arthrodesis techniques as a treatment for low back pain justifies an objective review of this results.

PURPOSE

carry out a systematic review of the literature to evaluate the clinical results of patients with low back pain treated with percutaneous arthrodesis of the SIJ.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

Systematic search of the medical literature. The words used in the Search were: "Hollow screw system", "percutaneous sacroiliac joint stabilization", "sacroiliac joint", "minimally invasive", "sacroiliac pain", "sacroiliac dysfunction". With logical connectors such as "and", "not" and "or".

DATABASES

Pubmed, Scopus, Embase, Ovid, EBSCO host and google scholar. The search extended from the beginning of the databases until September 2024. The "Rayyan" program was used to collect the information and facilitate the analysis process.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Systematic review from the literature, clinical trials, observational studies and case series. They followed PRISMA principles.

RESULTS

661 articles were found, of which 108 articles were duplicates. The criteria (Inclusion/Exclusion) were applied to the 553 articles identified based on the independent reading of the summaries by each of the authors on the Rayyan platform and 434 articles were excluded. The 119 selected articles were completely reviewed to finally obtain 102 articles included in the review. Epidemiological data were extracted into an Excel table, methodological and related to clinical results and safety of procedures made. The Prisma checklist for systematic reviews was applied in each article. The epidemiological quality of the articles was evaluated based on the checklists STROBE and CONSORT. The results regarding clinical improvement were overwhelming. However, most of the studies were sponsored by industry and with a limited population and follow-up not always prolonged.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the clinical results regarding the effectiveness of SIJ fusion are forceful for their effectiveness, we recommend considering some aspects for their analysis and especially long-term studies.

Full-Endoscopic Sacroiliac Joint Denervation for Painful Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction: A Prospective 2-Year Clinical Outcomes and Predictors for Improved Outcomes

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Full-endoscopic sacroiliac joint denervation (FE-SJD) is a novel technique for the management of pain secondary to sacroiliac joint dysfunction. The aim of this study was to assess the long-term efficacy, safety, clinical outcomes, and outcome predictors of uniportal full-endoscopic sacroiliac joint denervation.

METHODS

From 2019 to 2021, a total of 47 consecutive patients with pain secondary to sacroiliac joint dysfunction underwent uniportal FE-SJD through posterior approach by a single fellowship-trained spine surgeon. A retrospective analysis of perioperative parameters, complications, and clinical outcomes were obtained prospectively.

RESULTS

The patient cohort had a mean age of 59.4 ± 14.0 years, with 63.8% females. Symptom duration averaged 62.1 ± 53.7 months. The mean operative time was 57.1 ± 16.8 minutes. All patients were discharged on the same day of surgery. Significant improvement was noted in preoperative visual analog score (back) and Oswestry Disability Index scores at 3, 6, 12 months, and 2 years ( P < .001). Thirty-four patients (72.3%) returned to normal functioning with an average of 82% pain relief and a satisfaction rate of 78.7% at a mean follow-up of 18.2 ± 13.1 months. There were no intraoperative complications. One patient had postoperative right L5 dysesthesia. Seven patients (14.9%) underwent contralateral FE-SJD due to satisfaction with the index procedure but residual pain on the contralateral side. Concomitant lumbar issues correlated with less functional improvement at 2 years ( P = .009).

CONCLUSION

The long-term clinical results of FE-SJD are favorable. Endoscopic denervation of the dorsal rami branches supplying the sacroiliac joint represents a safe, effective, and durable option to address pain secondary to sacroiliac joint dysfunction. A significant factor that influences outcomes is the presence of concomitant lumbar pathology. Further research is needed to compare this technique with current available treatment options.

Injury to the Superior Gluteal Artery During Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Joint Fusion: A Case Series

CASE

A rarely reported complication with sacroiliac joint fusion (SJF) is an iatrogenic injury to the superior gluteal artery (SGA). This case series includes 3 cases which had a suspected injury to the SGA. Case 1 describes how hemostasis achieved with exploration of the wound followed by embolization by interventional radiology (IR). In Case 2, electrocautery, hemostatic agents, and pressure were used with success. Case 3 highlights the use of IR as the initial method for controlling bleeding.

CONCLUSION

This report describes a rare complication during SJF and provides an algorithm to help guide surgeons in decision making.

Navigated Simultaneous Lateral Minimally Invasive Tubular and Posterior Mini-Open Access for Removal and Revision of Triangular Sacroiliac Joint Implants: A Technical Note

BACKGROUND

Sacroiliac joint (SIJ) fusion, to treat back pain caused by SIJ dysfunction, can employ open or minimally invasive surgery (MIS) techniques and either cylindrical (screw-shaped) or triangular (wedge-shaped) implants. Fusion nonunion sometimes explains recurrent SIJ pain following fusion and occasionally requires hardware revision. MIS revision minimizes patient pain, infection, and disability, but due to the triangular implant size and form factor, implant removal can present challenges for MIS access during the explantation and achieving good bony purchase for reinstrumentation. Here, we report a prone single-position lateral MIS/posterior mini-open procedure for triangular-implant SIJ fusion revision.

METHODS

The patient is a 72-year-old female who underwent right SIJ fusion for lower back and leg pain sustained after a fall 2 years prior but experienced recurrent pain over the subsequent 2 years, with imaging findings of right SIJ peri-hardware lucencies and diagnostic injections confirming persistent right-sided sacroiliitis.

RESULTS

The patient underwent hardware removal using the lateral MIS incision with table-mounted tubular access and image-guided navigation to maintain exposure, plus simultaneous reinstrumentation using a navigated S2-alar-iliac screw and iliac bolt construct with connecting rod through the posterior mini-open incision made for the navigation reference frame spinous process clamp.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of navigation and MIS access can significantly decrease the complexity of lateral hardware removal, and mini-open navigated screw-and-rod constructs offer reinstrumentation options accessible to surgeons unfamiliar with specialized posterior SIJ systems.

Safety, Efficacy, and Durability of Outcomes: Results from SECURE: A Single Arm, Multicenter, Prospective, Clinical Study on a Minimally Invasive Posterior Sacroiliac Fusion Allograft Implant

Introduction

Research suggests that sacroiliac joint (SIJ) dysfunction is responsible for 15% to 30% of reported low back pain cases. Recently, there has been an increasing interest in SIJ fusion using minimally invasive surgery (MIS) due to safety. Initially, devices designed for MIS were intended for lateral approaches. A minimally invasive sacroiliac fusion implant for use with a posterior approach has been developed and is regulated for clinical use under the regulatory framework required for human cells, tissues, or cellular or tissue-based products (HCT/Ps).

Methods

A multi-center, prospective, single-arm study was launched after initial studies provided preliminary data to support safety, efficacy, and durability of this minimally invasive sacroiliac posterior fusion LinQ allograft implant (NCT04423120). Preliminary results were reported previously. Final results for the full participant cohort are presented here.

Results

One-hundred and fifty-nine (159) participants were enrolled across 16 investigational sites in the US between January 2020 and March 2022. One-hundred and twenty-two (122) participants were implanted. At the 1-month follow-up, 82 participants satisfied all criteria for the composite responder endpoint, representing 73.2% of the study cohort. These results stayed consistent across the remaining study timepoints with 66.0%, 74.4%, and 73.5% of participants classified as responders at the 3-, 6- and 12-month follow-up visits, respectively. VAS scores were significantly reduced (p < 0.0001) and ODI scores were significantly improved (p < 0.0001). All domains of the PROMIS-29 were also significantly improved (all p's <0.0001). Only one procedure-related serious AE was reported in the study.

Conclusion

These results suggest that the posterior approach LinQ Implant System is a safe and effective treatment for sacroiliac joint dysfunction at 12 months, with results that are favorable compared to outcomes reported for an FDA-cleared lateral approach.

The therapeutic effectiveness of fluoroscopically guided intra-articular sacroiliac joint injections in patients with sacroiliac joint dysfunction, an observational study

Objective

The goal of this project is to evaluate the therapeutic effectiveness of fluoroscopically guided intra-articular sacroiliac (SI) joint injections in patients with diagnosed SI joint dysfunction. Patient reported outcomes related to pain and quality of life measures were evaluated.

Design

This is a retrospective observational study of patients receiving intra-articular SI joint injections under a single provider at the Cleveland Clinic from September 2013 to April 2019. Three hundred fifty-one patients received injections and were administered patient reported outcomes (PROs) including the Numeric Rating Scale, Patient Health Questionnaire, Pain Disability Questionnaire, EuroQol-5 Dimensions Questionnaire, and PROMIS-GH Physical and Mental Health at baseline and approximately 1-, 3-, 6-, 12-, and 24-month time points during follow-up appointments. The primary outcome measure was the percentage of patients receiving their first injection who achieved minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in these PROs at each follow-up time point. Secondary outcomes were the percentage of patients achieving MCID in each PRO for each injection analyzed (including patients who received repeat injections) and average change in these PROs at each time point for first and all injections.

Results

A total of 351 patients were included in the analysis, with varying time points of follow-up. The average patient age was 52.3 (±14.9) years with 74.9% female and 59.0% white. For first time injections, the MCID was achieved for Numeric Rating Scale in 60.6%, 42.1%, 47.5%, and 32.5% of patients at 1-, 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up, respectively. There was significant improvement in PROMIS-GH Physical Health at 3-month, 6-month, and 1-year follow-up. There was no significant improvement in PROMIS-GH Mental Health at any follow-up time points.

Conclusions

Fluoroscopically guided intra-articular SI joint injection for SI joint dysfunction is effective in providing therapeutic pain relief exceeding MCID values in greater than 60% of patients at 1 month and greater than 40% at 3- and 6- months after injection. However, while this intervention may provide significant pain relief and improvement in function, it may not address the psychosocial aspect of chronic pain to the same extent.

Posterior oblique technique for sacroiliac joint fusion leads to greater pain relief and similar improvement in function compared to the lateral technique: A retrospective, comparative study

BACKGROUND

Management of chronic sacroiliac joint (SIJ) pain among patients who do not respond to nonsurgical treatment is increasingly turning toward minimally invasive SIJ fusion. There are different techniques available to perform this procedure, with the lateral technique being more commonly studied than the posterior oblique technique. This study examined the effects of these techniques on pain relief and functional improvement, both preoperatively and at a 12-month follow-up.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study analyzed data from 45 patients who underwent SIJ fusion. Included patients were ≥50 years old, nonresponsive to conservative treatment. Subjects were divided into 2 cohorts based on the SIJ fusion technique. Primary outcomes were pain relief, measured by Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and functional improvement, determined by the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI); both were recorded and assessed at baseline, postoperative, and the change from pre- to postoperative. Additionally, data regarding patient demographics, previous lumbar fusion, operative time, and duration of hospital stay were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

Baseline demographic and clinical variables exhibited no significant differences in distribution between groups. The posterior oblique cohort demonstrated a substantial reduction in operative time (over 50%) and duration of hospital stay compared to lateral cohort. Pain relief (postoperative VAS: lateral 3.5±1.7 vs. posterior oblique 2.4±1.5 [p=.02]) and functional improvement (postoperative ODI: lateral 29.6±7.3 vs. posterior oblique 21±5.7 [p≤.001]) were significantly better in the posterior oblique group. Pre- to postoperative improvement analysis indicated greater reduction in pain (VAS: lateral -4.4±1.9 vs. posterior oblique -6.1±1.5 [p=.002]) in the posterior oblique group.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to the lateral technique group, patients undergoing minimally invasive SIJ fusion through the posterior oblique technique experienced greater pain relief and demonstrated a trend toward better functional improvement, with shorter operative times and duration of hospital stay. The posterior oblique technique may be more efficient and beneficial to manage patients suffering from chronic SIJ pain through joint fusion.

Posterior Oblique Approach for Sacroiliac Joint Fusion

Introduction Sacroiliac joint (SIJ) pain is a common source of low back pain. Though this condition can be treated with conservative measures, there is a subset of patients who fail to respond to conservative treatment. For them, surgical treatment using minimally invasive techniques could be considered. There are currently a number of SIJ fixation methods described. However, there is no case series reported on posterior oblique approach. Therefore, in this paper, the authors report their experience with the Sacrix system via the posterior oblique approach. Method In this series, 19 patients aged 44-84 years, with a median of 58 years, underwent SIJ fusion using this technique. This is a posterior oblique approach in which two screws are inserted into the ilium through the posterior part of the iliac crest and then advanced into the sacrum through the SIJ. Results The follow-up is between 7 and 30 months, with a median of 12 months. Eighteen patients had excellent pain relief. There was no complication from the procedure, and the blood loss was minimal. All eight patients who had follow-up radiographs showed solid fusion. Conclusion Posterior oblique approach for SIJ fusion is a minimally invasive procedure that proved to be effective and safe in this series. It also resulted in solid radiographic fusion, decreased pain, and improved function.

Outcomes After Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Joint Fusion: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Sacroiliac joint (SIJ) dysfunction is a significant contributor to lower back pain. Although open surgical treatment for persistent pain has long been the standard, it is associated with significant surgical morbidity, high complication rates, and variable patient satisfaction. Minimally invasive SIJ fusion (MISJF) is a promising and effective approach. This scoping review was carried out to map the available evidence on outcomes after MISJF.

METHODS

This review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Inclusion criteria were all full-text articles reporting on functional, clinical, and quality-of-life outcomes after MISJF. Exclusion criteria consisted of studies including patients with traumatic sacroiliac injuries or congenital spinal abnormalities, and procedures involving multiple spinal fusions or an open approach to SIJ fusion.

RESULTS

A total of 1305 studies were identified across 6 databases. After duplicate removal and further screening, 33 independent studies were included in our review. Regarding pain management, 21 studies reported visual analog scale scores, and all showed significant (>50%) reductions in pain at multiple time points postoperatively. Six studies reported on quality-of-life outcomes and showed significant increases, especially compared with nonsurgical treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights the existing literature regarding outcomes after MISJF. MISJF provides favorable responses in quality-of-life metrics, pain scores, and overall postoperative outcomes in select patients. Although outcomes have been widely studied, more studies, especially prospectively designed and those without industry influence, should be performed to elucidate the optimal management of patients with intractable SIJ pain.

Sacroiliac Joint Fusion: Fusion Rates and Clinical Improvement Using Minimally Invasive Approach and Intraoperative Navigation and Robotic Guidance

STUDY DESIGN

This study adopted a retrospective study design.

PURPOSE

This study was designed to describe the fusion rate and technique and patient subjective improvement after sacroiliac (SI) joint fusion using a minimally invasive surgical (MIS) approach.

OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE

The SI joint can mimic radicular or discogenic pain localized to the lower back, gluteal region, or sacral region, posing a challenge in the diagnosis and treatment. This study determines the radiological fusion rate and patient reported subjective clinical outcomes of SI joint fusion using an MIS approach, comparing the use of the Rialto SI joint fusion system (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA) with the help of the Stealth Navigation System with the use of ExcelsiusGPS Robotic Navigation Platform (Globus Medical Inc., Audubon, PA, USA) using SI-LOK screws (Globus Medical Inc.).

METHODS

In this retrospective study, 43 consecutive patients who underwent SI joint fusion between August 2017 and February 2020 were enrolled; 60 SI joints were fused. The patients' fusion was documented on computed tomography or X-rays, and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores were used to determine patient subjective clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 60 joints were fused, including 26 joints fused using robotic guidance and 34 joints fused using the Stealth Navigation System. Student t-test was used to compare the mean preoperative VAS score (7.52±1.3) with the mean postoperative VAS score at the 12-month follow-up (1.43±1.22) (p<0.05). The SI joint fusion rate using this technique was 61% at 6 months, 96.4% at 12 months, and 100% at 18 months.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of navigation guidance or robotic assistance enables accurate percutaneous screw placement across the SI joint. The use of bone morphogenetic protein in the screw bore hastens fusion across the joint, improving patient-perceived pain.

Minimally Invasive and Conservative Interventions for the Treatment of Sacroiliac Joint Pain: A Review of Recent Literature

Sacroiliac joint (SIJ) pain is responsible for approximately 15-25% of reported back pain. Patients with SIJ pain report some of the lowest quality of life scores of any chronic disease. Understanding of the physiology and pathology of the SI joint has changed dramatically over the years, and SI joint pain and injury can now be thought of in two broad categories: traumatic and atraumatic. Both categories of SI joint injury are thought to be caused by inflammation or injury of the joint capsule, ligaments, or subchondral bone in the SI joint. Treatment of SI joint pain usually involves a multi-pronged approach, utilizing both, multi-modal medical pain control and interventional pain/surgical techniques such as steroid injections, radiofrequency nerve ablation, and minimally invasive sacroiliac arthrodesis. Though conservative management through multi-modal pain control and physical therapy have their role as first line therapies, an increasing body of evidence supports the use of minimally invasive procedures, both as adjuvant treatments to conservative management and as second line therapies for patient's that fail first line treatment.

Minimally Invasive and Conservative Interventions for the Treatment of Sacroiliac Joint Pain: A Review of Recent Literature

Sacroiliac joint (SIJ) pain is responsible for approximately a third of reported back pain. Patients with SIJ pain report some of the lowest quality of life scores of any chronic disease. Understanding of the physiology and pathology of the SI joint has changed dramatically over the years, and SI joint pain and injury can now be thought of in two broad categories: traumatic and atraumatic. Both categories of SI joint injury are thought to be caused by inflammation or injury of the joint capsule, ligaments, or subchondral bone in the SI joint. Treatment of SI joint pain usually involves a multi-pronged approach, utilizing both, multi-modal medical pain control and interventional pain/surgical techniques such as steroid injections, radiofrequency nerve ablation, and minimally invasive sacroiliac arthrodesis. Though conservative management through multi-modal pain control and physical therapy have their role as first line therapies, an increasing body of evidence supports the use of minimally invasive procedures, both as adjuvant treatments to conservative management and as second line therapies for patient's that fail first line treatment.

Reconstruction Using a Fibular Autograft for Lumbosacral Spinal Deformity in Neurofibromatosis Type 1: A Report of 2 Cases

CASES

We present 2 cases (19- and 40-year-old women) of lumbosacral spinal deformity with sacroiliac joint destruction. Reconstruction surgery using a fibular strut autograft was performed in both patients, and spinal reconstruction and fusion were successfully maintained without bone resorption for at least 7 years.

CONCLUSION

This is the first report of reconstructive surgery using a fibular strut bone graft for lumbosacral deformity with destruction of the sacroiliac joint in patients with neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF-1). These findings suggest that reconstruction with a fibular strut autograft is useful for lumbosacral spinal deformity that includes destruction of the sacroiliac joints in NF-1.

First clinical results of a novel minimally-invasive fusion system for the sacroiliac joint

BACKGROUND

Sacroiliac joint (SIJ) painful dysfunction is a common source of low back pain (LBP). Several surgical treatment options for SIJ fusion were described. A promising treatment option with demonstrated clinical improvement is the minimally-invasive SIJ fusion.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this case study was to document the effectiveness and safety of the new SIJ system (Torpedo®) over a period of 6 months after the minimally invasive implantation.

METHODS

Patients with failed conservative treatment of painful SIJ dysfunction were enrolled successively in two centers. The Diagnosis was made by positive response to SIJ-injection with local anesthetic and at least by two positive SIJ provocation tests. The Torpedo® Implant system was used for the implantation. This workpiece made of titanium alloy is characterized by a helical profile geometry (CST: chronical spinal turn) with a hydrophilic surface. The evaluated endpoints LBP and grade of disability were assessed using a 0-10 numerical rating scale (NRS), and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) preoperatively and at one, three and six months postoperatively.

RESULTS

15 patients (10 female, 5 male; mean age 59 ± 13 years) were operated on one after the other. The pain intensity decreased in all 15 patients. After 6 months, a decrease in the median values of 70% (quartiles 1-3: 65-79%) was calculated. The median values of the Oswestry Disability Index after 6 months were 62% (quartiles 1-3: 53-67) lower than before the operation. Before surgery, 13 patients (87%) were taking opioids for pain management. Six months after the operation, opioids were only needed by 3 patients (20%). Implant malpositioning was not detected on plain radiograph. No surgical site infections or perioperative complications occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical improvement in early follow up and the absence of surgery related complications demonstrate a high grade of device-related safety and effectiveness of the treatment with a novel minimally-invasive SIJ fusion system.

The degenerative changes of the sacroiliac joint after S2 alar-iliac screw placement

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this study was to investigate clinical outcomes and risk factors for the progression of sacroiliac joint (SIJ) degeneration and bone formation after S2 alar-iliac screw (S2AIS) insertion.

METHODS

Using preoperative and follow-up CT scan findings (median follow-up 26 months, range 16-43 months), the authors retrospectively studied 100 SIJs in 50 patients who underwent S2AIS placement. The authors measured the progression of SIJ degeneration and bone formation after S2AIS insertion, postoperative new-onset SIJ pain, S2AIS-related reoperation, and instrumentation failures. Stepwise multivariate logistic regression modeling was performed to clarify the risk factors associated with the progression of SIJ degeneration.

RESULTS

Significant progression of SIJ degeneration was observed in 10% of the group with preoperative SIJ degeneration (p = 0.01). Bone formation was observed in 6.9% of joints. None of the patients with these radiographic changes had new-onset SIJ pain or underwent reoperation related to instrumentation failures. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that preoperative SIJ degeneration (p < 0.01) and a young age at surgery (p = 0.03) significantly affected the progression of SIJ degeneration.

CONCLUSIONS

The progression of SIJ degeneration and bone formation neither led to major screw-related complications nor affected the postoperative clinical course during the median follow-up period of 26 months. Although S2AIS insertion is a safe procedure for most patients, the results of this study suggested that preoperative degeneration and younger age at surgery affected SIJ degeneration after S2AIS insertion. Further long-term observation may reveal other effects of S2AIS insertion on SIJ degeneration.

Three-Year Clinical Outcomes after Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Joint Arthrodesis Using Triangular Implants in Japan: A Pilot Study of Five Cases

Introduction

Sacroiliac joint (SIJ) arthrodesis using a minimally invasive technique, particularly the triangular implant system, is performed in patients with SIJ dysfunction in the United States and Europe. We report three-year clinical outcomes of the first minimally invasive SIJ arthrodesis procedures using the implants performed in Japan.

Methods

Five patients (one man and four women; age: 56.4±16.9 years) with SIJ pain who underwent SIJ arthrodesis using a triangular implant system in 2017 were included. In addition to operation time and blood loss, pain intensity (visual analog scale [VAS]) and functional impairment (Oswestry disability index [ODI]) were assessed preoperatively and at a 36-month follow-up. Implant loosening and osseous bridging across the joint were evaluated using computed tomography images, and patients' satisfaction with the surgery was also assessed at 12 and 36 months.

Results

The surgical time was 67.7±13.1 minutes, and blood loss was 7.4±6.9 mL. The mean VAS value improved significantly from 88.0±8.4 mm to 33.6±31.9 mm at 3 months and was maintained at 46.4±30.9 mm at 36 months (P<0.05). The mean ODI improved significantly from 76.4%±3.8% to 46.2%±21.9% at 6 months postoperatively (P<0.05) but had no significant improvements thereafter: 46.94±23.7% (12 months) and 66.4±8.6% (36 months). Three of five patients presented with at least one implant loosening on the sacrum side. No patient had osseous bridging across the joint. A total of 80% (4/5) of patients reported satisfaction with the surgery at 12 months and 60% (3/5) at 36 months.

Conclusions

The mean VAS value and ODI significantly improved until 6 months after the surgery. However, the mean ODI was reaggravated at 36 months after the surgery. Osseous bridging across the joint was not observed in all patients. We should carefully keep an eye on further long-term results to evaluate the implant.

Clinical results following robotic navigation guidance for sacroiliac joint fusion in 36 patients

OBJECTIVE

In this study, the authors aimed to describe a new technique of sacroiliac joint (SIJ) fusion using a robotic navigation guidance system and to document clinical results with patient-reported visual analog scale (VAS) scores.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with SIJ dysfunction were surgically treated using 2 hydroxyapatite (HA)–coated, threaded screws with the aid of the robotic navigation system. In a total of 36 patients, 51 SIJs were fused during the study period. Patients’ VAS scores were used to determine clinical improvement in pain. Postoperative imaging at routine intervals during the follow-up period was also performed for assessment of radiological fusion. In addition, complication events were recorded, including reoperations.

RESULTS

All 36 patients had successful fusion evidenced by both CT and clinical assessment at the final follow-up. Two patients underwent reoperation because of screw loosening. The mean preoperative VAS score was 7.2 ± 1.1, and the mean 12-month postoperative VAS score was 1.6 ± 1.46. This difference was statistically significant (p < 0.05) and demonstrated a substantial clinical improvement in pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic navigation–assisted SIJ fusion using 2 HA-coated, threaded screws placed across the joint was an acceptable technique that demonstrated reliable clinical results with a significant improvement in patient-reported VAS pain scores.

Preliminary Results of Endoscopic Radiofrequency Treatment of the Sacroiliac Joint Syndrome

BACKGROUND AND STUDY

 The sacroiliac joint (SIJ) may be the primary source of pain in 15 to 25% of patients with axial low back pain. Furthermore, 75% of patients who have had fusion surgery develop SIJ pain within 10 years. Treatment options include SIJ blocks, radiofrequency (RF) denervation, and fusion. The RF techniques range from ablation of the nerves supplying the joint, creating lesions to the joint itself, or a combination of both techniques. However, different clinical studies could only identify a limited or, in some cases, no effect in decreasing of pain intensity and duration of the effect.

METHODS

 In this retrospective study, we selected 23 patients with SIJ pain, with a duration of more than 12 months and a 50% pain reduction on the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) after diagnostic block. All patients received endoscopic ablation of the medial branch L5/S1 and the lateral branches, exiting the sacral foramina on S1/S2 and S2/S3 on both sides while using only one incision on each side. Telephone interviews were conducted with all patients. The outcome was determined with Odom's criteria, percent reduction NRS, subjective assessment of the patient, and duration of the effect.

RESULTS

 According to Odom's criteria, 79% of the patients showed acceptable to excellent results and confirmed that denervation helped them to manage their daily lives better. The average pain reduction in the responder group was 57% with an average duration of 13.4 months.

CONCLUSION

 In this retrospective study, we could demonstrate the practicability and effectiveness of endoscopic SIJ denervation in the treatment of SIJ pain using only one incision for three levels on each side. Further studies should investigate if this procedure is more effective than percutaneous RF.

Impact of diagnosis and type of sacroiliac joint fusion on postoperative complications

PURPOSE

Two main surgical approaches are available for fusing the sacroiliac joint (SIJ): an open or minimally invasive (MIS) approach. The purpose of this study was to analyze the associated total hospital charges and postoperative complications of the MIS and open approach.

METHODS

Using the 2016 and 2017 National Readmission Database, we conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of 2521 patients who received a SIJ fusion with an open (N = 1990) or MIS (N = 531) approach for diagnosed sacrum pain, sacroiliitis, sacral instability, or spondylosis. Each cohort was analyzed for postoperative complications.

RESULTS

We identified 604 patients diagnosed with sacrum pain, 1142 with sacroiliitis, 315 with spondylosis, and 288 with sacral instability. Patients who received the open approach for sacrum pain had significantly higher rates of novel post-procedural pain (p = 0.045) and novel lumbar pathology (p = 0.015) within 30 days. On 30-day follow-up, patients with sacroiliitis treated with open SIJ fusion had significantly higher rates of novel postprocedural pain compared to those treated with MIS fusion (p = 0.045). Patients who received the open approach for spondylosis resulted in significantly higher rates of non-elective readmission within 30 days compared to the MIS approach (p < 0.0001). In addition, the open technique for spondylosis resulted in significantly higher rates of non-elective readmissions for infection within 30 days (p = 0.014). On 30-day follow-up, patients with sacral instability treated with open SIJ fusion had significantly higher rates of UTI (p = 0.045).

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests that there exist unique postoperative complications that arise after SIJ fusion specific to preoperative diagnosis and surgical approach.

[Minimally invasive arthrodesis of the sacroiliac joint (SIJ)]

OBJECTIVE

Pain reduction and improvement in quality of life with sacroiliac joint (SIJ) fusion.

INDICATIONS

Chronic SIJ-associated pain; positive response to SIJ injection with local anesthetic; positive SIJ provocation tests; failed conservative therapy over 6 months.

CONTRAINDICATIONS

Non-SIJ-associated pain; tumor/infection/unstable fracture in the implantation area; malformations; tumor or osteolysis of the sacrum or ilium bone; active infection at the implantation site; allergy to metal components; secondary gain from illness, request for a pension; inadequately treated osteoporosis.

SURGICAL TECHNIQUE

Transarticular placement of Kirschner's wires through the SI joint via minimally invasive lateral approach. Guided preparation of implant site over Kirschner's wires and implantation of 3 triangular, transarticular titanium implants for SIJ fusion.

POSTOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT

Deep vein thrombosis prophylaxis. 3 weeks partial weight-bearing and then moving on to full weight-bearing. X‑ray controls at defined intervals. Physiotherapy.

RESULTS

We enrolled 26 patients who were followed up over the period of 4 years. The evaluated endpoints were low back pain on the visual analog scale (VAS 0-10), grade of disability with the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and quality of life with the EuroQOL-5D. At 4 years, mean low back pain improved compared to preoperative (VAS preoperative 8.4, VAS 4 years postoperative 4.6). Mean improvements in ODI (ODI preoperative 58.1, ODI 4 years postoperative 32.1) and EQ-5D (preoperative 0.5, after 4 years 0.7) could be evaluated over the long-term period of 4 years. Satisfaction rates were high and the proportion of subjects taking opioids decreased at the 4‑year follow-up (preoperative 82%, postoperative 39%). Implant loosening could not be detected on plain radiograph.

Propensity-matched Analysis of 1062 Patients Following Minimally Invasive Versus Open Sacroiliac Joint Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

This was a retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the hospital charges and postoperative complications of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and open approaches to sacroiliac joint (SIJ) fusion.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The data source utilized in this study is the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project National Readmission Database (NRD) from 2016 and 2017. The NRD is a yearly nationally representative inpatient database from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality with information regarding patient demographics, diagnoses, procedures, and readmissions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The 2016-2017 NRD was used to identify 2521 patients receiving SIJ fusion with open (n=1990) or MIS approaches (n=531) for diagnosed sacrum pain, sacroiliitis, sacral instability, or spondylosis after excluding for those who received prior SIJ fusion, those diagnosed with neoplasms or trauma of the pelvis or sacrum, and nonelective procedures. We then one-to-one propensity-matched the open (n=531) to the MIS approach (n=531) for age, sex, and Charlson Comorbidity Index. Statistical analysis was performed to compare total hospital charges, immediate surgical complications, nonelective readmission rate, and 30-, 90-, and 180-day postoperative complications between the 2 approaches.

RESULTS

The mean total hospital charge was the only significant difference between 2 group. Open SIJ fusion had significantly higher charge compared with the MIS approach (open $101,061.90±$81,136.67; MIS $83,594.78±$49,086.00, P<0.0001). The open approach was associated with nonsignificant higher rates of novel lumbar pathology at 30-, 90-, and 180-day readmissions and revision surgeries at 30 and 180 days. MIS approach had higher rates nervous system complications at 30-, 90-, and 180-day readmission, as well as infection and urinary tract infection within 30 days, none being significant. Novel postprocedural pain was similar between the 2 groups at 90 and 180 days.

CONCLUSIONS

The current study found that open SIJ fusion was associated with significantly higher hospital charges. Although no significant differences in postoperative complications were found, there were several notable trends specific to each surgical approach.

Surgical Outcomes of Patients with Sacroiliac Joint Pain: An Analysis of Patients with Poor Results Regarding Activities of Daily Living

Introduction

Sacroiliac joint (SIJ) arthrodesis is the last resort for patients with severe SIJ pain. However, this technique does not always provide good outcomes regarding activities of daily living (ADL). This study aims to reveal the preoperative clinical features associated with poor outcomes of SIJ arthrodesis.

Methods

Twenty-six consecutive patients who underwent SIJ arthrodesis between 2009 and 2018 were evaluated. Good-outcome was defined as ≥30% improvement in ADL, quantified by the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RDQ). The good-outcome group (17 patients; 10 men and 7 women, 42.5±8.4 years old) and the poor-outcome group (9 patients; 1 man and 8 women, 47.0±17.9 years old) were compared to identify the preoperative clinical features of poor surgical outcomes.

Results

No significant differences were observed between the two groups regarding age, preoperative RDQ score, time between onset and the confirmed diagnosis of SIJ pain, and the time between diagnosis and surgical treatment. The following preoperative clinical features associated with poor surgical outcomes were identified: female sex, pain in multiple regions, walking with a cane, and the use of a wheelchair before surgery (P<0.05).

Conclusions

The present study demonstrated that poor postoperative outcomes in patients with severe SIJ pain were associated with the following preoperative clinical features: female sex, pain in multiple regions, walking with a cane, or use of a wheelchair. Ample attention is warranted in patients with such features who are indicated for surgical treatments.

International Society for the Advancement of Spine Surgery Policy 2020 Update-Minimally Invasive Surgical Sacroiliac Joint Fusion (for Chronic Sacroiliac Joint Pain): Coverage Indications, Limitations, and Medical Necessity

The index 2014 International Society for the Advancement of Spine Surgery Policy Statement-Minimally Invasive Surgical Sacroiliac Joint Fusion-was generated out of necessity to provide an International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9)-based background and emphasize tools to ensure correct diagnosis. A timely ICD-10-based 2016 update provided a granular threshold selection with improved level of evidence and a more robust and relevant database (Appendix Table A1). As procedures and treatment options have evolved, this 2020 update reviews and analyzes the expanding evidence base and provides guidance relating to differences between the lateral and dorsal surgical procedures for minimally invasive surgical sacroiliac joint fusion.

Sacroiliac joint fusion VS conservative management for chronic low back pain attributed to the sacroiliac joint: A protocol for systematic review and meta analysis

INTRODUCTION

Low back pain (LBP) is high prevalent and it is the leading cause of years lived with disability in both developed and developing countries. The sacroiliac joint (SIJ) is a common reason that caused LBP. At present, the treatment of chronic LBP attributed to SIJ is mainly conservative treatment and surgical treatment. However, there are still controversies between the 2 treating methods, and there is no recognized standard of treatment or surgical indications. Recent publications indicated that minimally invasive sacroiliac joint arthrodesis was safe and more effective improving pain, disability, and quality of life compared with conservative management in 2 years follow-up, which re-raise the focus of sacroiliac joints fusion. This paper will systematically review the available evidence, comparing the effectiveness of sacroiliac joint fusion and conservative therapy for the treatment of gait retraining for patients suffered from LBP attributed to the sacroiliac joint.

METHOD AND ANALYSIS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of relevant studies in Pubmed, Embase, SCOPUS, and Cochrane Library will be synthesized. Inclusion criteria will be studies evaluating clinical outcomes (i.e., changes to pain and/or function) comparing sacroiliac joint fusion and conservative therapy in populations sacroiliac join related LBP; studies with less than 10 participants in total will be excluded. The primary outcomes measured will be pain score, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and adverse events during treatment. Review Manager (Revman; Version 5.3) software will be used for data synthesis, sensitivity analysis, meta-regression, subgroup analysis, and risk of bias assessment. A funnel plot will be developed to evaluate reporting bias and Begg and Egger tests will be used to assess funnel plot symmetries. We will use the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system to assess the quality of evidence.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Our aim is to publish this systematic review and meta-analysis in a peer-reviewed journal. Our findings will provide information comparing the efficacy and safety comparing sacroiliac joint fusion and non-surgical treatment for patients with LBP attributed to the sacroiliac joint. This review will not require ethical approval as there are no issues about participant privacy.

Orthotics to Improve Pain in a Patient With Multiple Internal Fixations and Multilevel Thoracic Fusion

The authors present the case of a 24-year-old man who sustained multiple injuries during a hard landing following a parachute jump. These injuries included a right sacral fracture, bilateral femoral fractures, a separated pubic symphysis, and compression fractures of the fifth and sixth thoracic vertebrae. He was treated with a right sacroiliac joint fixation, pubic symphysis fixation, open reduction internal fixation of his bilateral femurs, and fusion of the third through seventh thoracic vertebrae. The patient experienced back pain, bilateral hip pain, and bilateral knee pain resistant to chiropractic and medical treatments. The patient presented 2 years after his aforementioned surgical procedures for treatment of persistent postoperative pain at the Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation service at the Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Hampton, Virginia. His treatment involved gait correction achieved using a left-sided heel lift and a transition to custom molded orthotics that incorporated the lift. This treatment leveled his sacral base and resulted in a simultaneous decrease in his self-reported pain scores.

iFuse Implant System for Treating Chronic Sacroiliac Joint Pain: A NICE Medical Technology Guidance

Treatment and management of sacroiliac joint pain is often non-surgical, involving packages of care that can include analgesics, physiotherapy, corticosteroid injections and radiofrequency ablation. Surgical intervention is considered when patients no longer respond to conservative management. The iFuse Implant System is placed across the sacroiliac joint using minimally invasive surgery, stabilising the joint and correcting any misalignment or weakness that can cause chronic pain. The iFuse system was evaluated in 2018 by the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) as part of the Medical Technologies Evaluation Programme (MTEP). Clinical evidence for iFuse suggests improved pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI) and quality of life compared to non-surgical management. The company (SI-Bone^®) submitted two cost models indicating that iFuse was cost saving compared with open surgery and non-surgical management. Clinicians advised that non-surgical management was the most appropriate comparator and Cedar (a health technology research centre) made changes to the model to test the impact of higher acquisition and procedure costs. Cedar found iFuse to be cost incurring by approximately £560 per patient at 7 years. During the consultation period, the company reduced the cost of some iFuse consumables, and Cedar extended the time horizon to test the assumption that iFuse would become cost saving over time. These changes indicated that iFuse becomes cost saving at 8 years (approximately £129 per patient), after which the cost saving continues to increase. NICE published guidance in October 2018 recommending that the case for adoption of the iFuse system in the UK National Health Service (NHS) was supported by the evidence.

Editorial Commentary: Consider the Sacroiliac Joint: Imaging a Source of Pain Can Feel Compelling. Orthopaedists Would Do Well to Remain Skeptical

With regard to the association of sacroiliac (SI) pain and hip arthroscopy outcomes, it is vital to understand that imaging the SI joint may be unreliable. A recent systematic review on diagnostic accuracy for SI joint pain concluded that more reliable criteria are strongly positive responses to diagnostic injection and a physical examination in which 3 or more provocative maneuvers are positive. SI joint degenerative changes can be found in a majority of asymptotic patients and might be considered normal finding until proven otherwise. When it comes to the spine and pelvis, radiologic changes should be interpreted by caution by both hip surgeons and spine surgeons.

Rheumatology in Poland

The aim of this article is to present the current state of rheumatology in Poland, including the scientific and clinical activity and essential aspects of Polish rheumatic patients' treatment. PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science databases were searched for main keywords: "rheumat*" and affiliation with Poland. Statistical data were obtained from the Central Statistical Office, the National Health Fund and the Polish Chamber of Physicians and Dentists, while the public information from the Polish Society for Rheumatology, the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Science and Higher Education. Databases of the World Health Organization, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development and the European Statistical Office (Eurostat) were used. Most Polish rheumatologists work in large urban agglomerations in the Mazovian, Malopolskie and Silesian Voivodeships. The rheumatologic infrastructure includes 1713 working rheumatologists (> 30% exceeding the age of 60 years), 2301 hospital beds, 2279 outpatient clinics and 955 private practices. Poland's state funding is relatively limited, this problem being addressed by health officials with special treatment programs for biological drugs. The Eurostat data indicate, that in Poland, like in the majority of EU Member States, there's a tendency of specialist/general practitioner ratio rising. The number of scientific publications by Polish rheumatologists has steadily increased in recent years. Poland's rheumatology has made an enormous progress at all levels of functioning in recent decades. The EULAR recommendations are mostly incorporated into the Polish health system, leaving still room for its further improvement in the fields of financing, therapy and education.

Mini-open sacroiliac joint fusion with direct bone grafting and minimally invasive fixation using intraoperative navigation

Background

Describe a novel technique for sacroiliac arthrodesis using intraoperative navigation, direct bone grafting, and minimally invasive implants. Report on the outcomes of the first cohort of these patients.

Methods

Institutional review board (IRB) approved, single center, two surgeon, retrospective study.

Results

All patients were 18 years or older, primary sacroiliac fusions, and underwent novel technique described. Fifty patients underwent 57 surgeries. Twelve male/38 female patients. All received three sacroiliac implants. Average blood loss 42.8 mL. Average length of stay 1.9 nights. Average follow-up 13.96±13 months. Statistically significant improvements in Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores (<0.001) for all time periods 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months compared to preop. Other outcomes scores [Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Denver Sacroiliac Joint Questionnaire (DSIJQ)] also showed a general trend for clinical improvement at all postoperative time periods. Of 2/57 (3.5%) complications were identified. No patients required surgical revision within the study window.

Conclusions

Limited open sacroiliac arthrodesis using minimally invasive implants, intraoperative navigation, and direct open bone grafting is safe and demonstrates clinical benefit, similar to other techniques for minimally invasive sacroiliac arthrodesis. There is potential for improved long-term outcomes from increased union rates.

Keywords

Sacroiliac dysfunction; minimally invasive sacroiliac fusion; open sacroiliac fusion; navigation.

A comparison of the polytomous Rasch analysis output of RUMM2030 and R (ltm/eRm/TAM/lordif)

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcome measures developed using Classical Test Theory are commonly comprised of ordinal level items on a Likert response scale are problematic as they do not permit the results to be compared between patients. Rasch analysis provides a solution to overcome this by evaluating the measurement characteristics of the rating scales using probability estimates. This is typically achieved using commercial software dedicated to Rasch analysis however, it is possible to conduct this analysis using non-specific open source software such a R.

METHODS

Rasch analysis was conducted using the most commonly used commercial software package, RUMM 2030, and R, using four open-source packages, with a common data set (6-month post-injury PRWE Questionnaire responses) to evaluate the statistical results for consistency. The analysis plan followed recommendations used in a similar study supported by the software package's instructions in order to obtain category thresholds, item and person fit statistics, measures of reliability and evaluate the data for construct validity, differential item functioning, local dependency and unidimensionality of the items.

RESULTS

There was substantial agreement between RUMM2030 and R with regards for most of the results, however there are some small discrepancies between the output of the two programs.

CONCLUSIONS

While the differences in output between RUMM2030 and R can easily be explained by comparing the underlying statistical approaches taken by each program, there is disagreement on critical statistical decisions made by each program. This disagreement however should not be an issue as Rasch analysis requires users to apply their own subjective analysis. While researchers might expect that Rasch performed on a large sample would be a stable, two authors who complete Rasch analysis of the PRWE found somewhat dissimilar findings. So, while some variations in results may be due to samples, this paper adds that some variation in findings may be software dependent.

Current concepts in spondylopelvic dissociation

INTRODUCTION

Spondylopelvic dissociation is an uncommon and complex injury that results from high-energy trauma with axial overloading through the sacrum. Due to the life-threatening nature of these injuries, standard Advanced Trauma Life Support^® (ATLS) protocol must be used in the trauma setting as part of the initial management of these patients. The key to diagnosis is a good physical exam coupled with high level of suspicion. Radicular neurological deficits commonly are present in spondylopelvic dissociation (L5's roots) and should be documented for future evaluations. Radiographic views and CT-scan is preferred for the diagnosis.

BIOMECHANICS AND CLASSIFICATION

The authors briefly describe the anatomy and biomechanics of the pelvis, and present the main classifications used to define this rare lesion.

TREATMENT

Discussion about setting the boundaries of surgical stabilization, if there is still a role for conservative treatment, the importance of the initial treatment and the timing of intervention. Decompression is mandatory in the presence of canal compromise and progressive neurological deficit, regardless of biomechanical criteria for surgery. Kyphotic deformity occurs at the site of sacral transverse fracture and also reduces anteroposterior pelvis diameter. The technique of reduction and posterior surgical stabilization is emphasized. If residual kyphosis remains after bilateral lumbopelvic fixation by shifting of the lower sacral segment, we use S2 and/or S3 screws connected to transitional rods to additional reduction. An illustrated case is shown.

COMPLICATIONS

The infection of the wound and the failure of the implants are the most frequent complications of this surgical treatment.

CONCLUSION

Posterior stabilization is widely recognized as crucial in the treatment of pelvic disruptions. The concept of circumferential restoration of pelvic ring by bilateral lumbopelvic fixation and anterior fixation seems to be a nice option to increase stabilization and avoid bone misalignment.

Predictors of Outcome in Conservative and Minimally Invasive Surgical Management of Pain Originating From the Sacroiliac Joint: A Pooled Analysis

STUDY DESIGN

A pooled patient-level analysis of two multicenter randomized controlled trials and one multicenter single-arm prospective trial.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to identify predictors of outcome of conservative and minimally invasive surgical management of pain originating from the sacroiliac joint (SIJ).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Three recently published prospective trials have shown that minimally invasive SIJ fusion (SIJF) using triangular titanium implants produces better outcomes than conservative management for patients with pain originating from the SIJ. Due to limitations in individual trial sample size, analyses of predictors of treatment outcome were not conducted.

METHODS

We pooled individual patient data from the three trials and used random effects models with multivariate regression analysis to identify predictors for treatment outcome separately for conservative and minimally invasive surgical treatment. Outcome was measured using visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and EuroQOL-5D (EQ-5D).

RESULTS

We included 423 patients assigned to either nonsurgical management (NSM, n = 97) or SIJF (n = 326) between 2013 and 2015. The reduction in SIJ pain was 37.9 points larger [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 32.5-43.4, P < 0.0001] in the SIJF group than in the NSM group. Similarly, the improvement in ODI was 18.3 points larger (95% CI 14.3-22.4), P < 0.0001). In NSM, we found no predictors of outcome. In SIJF, a reduced improvement in outcome was predicted by smoking (P = 0.030), opioid use (P = 0.017), lower patient age (P = 0.008), and lower duration of SIJ pain (P = 0.028).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results support the view that SIJF leads to better treatment outcome than conservative management of SIJ pain and that a higher margin of improvement can be predicted in nonsmokers, nonopioid users, and patients of increased age and with longer pain duration.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

1.

The Assessment of Fusion Following Sacroiliac Joint Fusion Surgery

Sacroiliac joint fusions (SIJF) have been the subject of many research studies. The technical success of an SIJF is in part determined by whether osseous bridging occurs across the sacroiliac joint (SIJ). However, no validated SIJF assessment method has been described. Our objective was to document previously described SIJF assessment methods and define and validate a detailed assessment system for SIJF. Our results are only intended to establish computed tomography (CT)-based guidelines for SIJF to be used in a subsequent large clinical study to correlate them with clinical outcomes.

The SIJF literature was reviewed to document previous descriptions of SIJF assessments. A detailed system was then developed for assessing SIJF from CT exams. To provide data that can be used to address a range of research questions, the system included assessing bridging bone relative to the SIJ anatomy, bridging bone immediately adjacent to the threaded implants crossing the joint, as well as bridging bone close to but not immediately adjacent to the implants. The system was applied to assessing SIJF from thin-slice CT exams in 19 patients 12 months following surgery. Two experienced radiologists implemented the assessment system, and in the event of a disagreement, an adjudicator was used.

Most prior studies provide very little detail about how SIJF was assessed. Using the new assessment system, the agreement between the primary readers was substantial (0.67 using Gwet’s AC1 statistic). Bridging bone representing a fusion of the SIJ was identified in most patients both immediately adjacent to the threaded implants crossing the joint, as well as distant to the implants.

A detailed radiographic assessment system proved to be applicable to SIJF. The assessment system includes explicit language describing the location and extent of bridging bone across the SIJ. Standardization of the assessment of the SIJFs may allow for a more meaningful comparison of data between studies.

Emerging Techniques in Degenerative Thoracolumbar Surgery

There continue to be incremental advances in thoracolumbar spine surgery techniques in attempts to achieve more predictable outcomes, minimize risk of complications, speed recovery, and minimize the costs of these interventions. This paper reviews recent literature with regard to emerging techniques of interest in the surgical treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis, fusion fixation and graft material, degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis, and thoracolumbar deformity and sacroiliac joint degeneration. There continue to be advances in minimal access options in these areas, although robust outcome data are heterogeneous in its support. The evidence in support of sacroiliac fusion appears to be growing more robust in the properly selected patient.

Delayed Bone Infarct in the Ilium Following a Pelvic Crush Injury and Embolization: A Case Report

CASE

We present a case of delayed osteonecrosis of the ilium. After receiving embolization and multiple orthopaedic procedures following a complex pelvic crush injury, the patient subsequently developed posterior pelvic pain and tenderness over the posterior superior iliac spine, along with pain on sacroiliac joint compression. Magnetic resonance imaging of the pelvis demonstrated a bone infarction in the left ilium adjacent to the sacroiliac joint.

CONCLUSION

The symptoms from osteonecrosis of the ilium may simulate sacroiliitis or other conditions. It is important to keep the differential diagnosis in mind when considering additional management for posterior pelvic pain in the setting of prior trauma and preexisting hardware.

Clinical outcome following anterior arthrodesis in patients with presumed sacroiliac joint pain

BACKGROUND

It has been reported that in 13-32% of patients with chronic low back pain, the pain may originate in the sacroiliac (SI) joints. When treatment of these patients with analgesics and physiotherapy has failed, a surgical solution may be discussed. Results of such surgery are often based on small series, retrospective analyses or studies using a minimal invasive technique, frequently sponsored by manufacturers.

PURPOSE

To report the clinical outcome concerning pain, function and quality of life following anterior arthrodesis in patients presumed to have SI joint pain using validated questionnaires pre- and post-operatively. An additional aim was to describe the symptoms of the patients included and the preoperative investigations performed.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Over a 6 year period we treated 55 patients, all women, with a mean age of 45 years (range 28-65) and a mean pelvic pain duration of 9.1 years (range 2-30). The pain started in connection with minor trauma in seven patients, pregnancy in 20 and unspecified in 28. All patients had undergone long periods of treatment including physiotherapy, manipulation, needling, pelvic belt, massage and chiropractic without success, and 15 had been operated for various spinal diagnoses without improvement. The patients underwent thorough neurological investigation, plain X-ray and MRI of the spine and plain X-ray of the pelvis. They were investigated by seven clinical tests aimed at indicating pain from the SI joints. In addition, all patients underwent a percutaneous mechanical provocation test and extra-articular local anaesthetic blocks against the posterior part of the SI joints. Before surgery all patients answered the generic Short-Form-36 (SF-36) questionnaire, the disease specific Balanced Inventory for Spinal Disorders (BIS) questionnaire and rated their level of pelvic and leg pain (VAS, 0-100). At follow-up at a mean of 2 years 49 patients completed the same questionnaires (89%).

RESULTS

At follow-up 26 patients reported a lower level of pelvic pain than before surgery, 16 the same level and six a higher level. Applying Svensson's method RP_{pelvic pain}=0.3976, with 95% CI (0.2211, 0.5740) revealed a statistically significant systematic improvement in pelvic pain. At follow-up 28 patients reported a higher quality of life and 26 reported sleeping better than pre-operatively. In most patients the character of the pelvic pain was dull and aching, often accompanied by a stabbing component in connection with sudden movements. Referred pain down the leg/s even to the feet and toes was noted by half of the patients and 29 experienced frequency of micturition.

CONCLUSIONS

It is apparent that in some patients the SI joints may cause long-term pain that can be treated by arthrodesis. We speculate that continued pain despite a healed arthrodesis may be due to persistent pain from adjacent ligaments. The next step should be a prospective randomized study comparing posterior fusion and ligament resection with non-surgical treatment.

IMPLICATIONS

Anterior arthrodesis can apparently relieve pain in some patients with presumed SI joint pain. The problem is how to identify these patients within the low back pain group.

ISASS Policy 2016 Update - Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Joint Fusion

The index 2014 ISASS Policy Statement - Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Joint Fusion was generated out of necessity to provide an ICD9-based background and emphasize tools to ensure correct diagnosis. A timely ICD10-based 2016 Update provides a granular threshold selection with improved level of evidence and a more robust, relevant database.

Microsurgery or open cervical foraminotomy for cervical radiculopathy? A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this article was to systematically review the clinical outcomes of microendoscopic foraminotomy compared with the traditional open cervical foraminotomy.

METHODS

A literature search of two databases was performed to identify investigations performed in the treatment of cervical foraminotomy with microsurgery or an open approach. Data including blood loss, surgical time, hospital stay, complications, clinical success rate, reduction of arm and neck pain, improvement of neurological function, and repeated surgery rate were summarized, calculated and compared. Results of clinical success were performed by calculattng effect indicators and standard errors based on a single rate to assess heterogeneity in the two groups.

RESULTS

The initial literature search resulted in 713 articles, of which, 26 were determined as relevant on abstract review. An open foraminotomy approach was performed in 16 and a microsurgery approach in ten studies. The open group demonstrated minimal to moderate heterogeneity, with I (2) value of 27 %; and microsurgery group demonstrated minimal heterogeneity, with I (2) value of 1 %. Aggregated data found that patients treated by microsurgery foraminotomy have lower blood loss by 100.1 ml (open: 149.5 ml, microsurgery: 49.4 ml, n = 1257), shorter surgical time by 24.9 minutes (open 88.7 minutes, microsurgery 63.8 minutes, n = 1423),and shorter hospital stay by 3.0 days (open 4.1 days, microsurgery 1.1 days, n = 1350), compared with patients treated by open cervical foraminotomy. The pooled clinical success rate was 89.7 % [confidence interval (CI) 87.7-91.6) in the open group versus 92.5 % (CI 89.9-95.1) in the microsurgery group, with no statistical difference (p = 0.095). Overall complication rates were not statistically significant between groups (p = 0.757). The incidence of dural tears was 1.07 %( 12/1121) in patients undergoing microsurgery versus 0.27 % (2/745) for open surgery (p = 0.091). The incidence of infection was 0.54 % (6/1121) in patients undergoing microsurgery versus 0.40 % (3/745) for open surgery (p = 0.949). The incidence of root injury was 0.80 % (9/1121) in patients undergoing microsurgery versus 1.48 % (11/745) for open surgery (p = 0.166). Revision surgery occurred in 2.32 % (27/1163) in the microsurgery group versus 3.35 % (28/835) for traditional surgery, with no statistical difference (p = 0.164). Pooled reduction in visual analogue scale for the arm (VASA) was 75.0 % (CI 66.0-84.0) in the open group and 87.1 % (CI:76.7, 97.5) in the microsurgery group, with no statistical difference (p = 0.065). Pooled reduction in VAS of the neck (VASN) was 66.2 % (CI:52.2, 80.2) in the open group and 68.1 % (CI:36.4, 99.8) in the microsurgery group, with no statistical difference(p = 0.894). Pooled improvement in neurological function was 55.3 % (CI:18.6, 91.9) in the open group and 64.9 % (CI:34.6, 95.2) in the microsurgery group, with no statistical difference (p = 0.576).

CONCLUSIONS

Although advantages of cervical microsurgery are less blood loss and shorter surgical time and hospital stay over the standard open technique, there is no significant difference in clinical success rate, complication rate, reduction of arm and neck pain and improvement of neurological function between microsurgery and open cervical foraminotomy.