Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 12 de 12
Filtrar
Más filtros













Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Indian J Orthop ; 58(4): 396-401, 2024 Apr.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38544543

RESUMEN

Purpose: Although many techniques exist, spinopelvic fixation continues to present challenges in the management of adult spinal deformity. Shear forces, complex anatomy, and bone quality are common reasons why spine surgeons continue to explore options for fixation. Methods: A retrospective chart reviewed of patients receiving pelvic fixation for adult spinal deformity over a 12-year period was conducted. Patients were divided into 3 cohorts based on date of surgery: (1) 2010 to 2013, (2) 2014 to 2017, and (3) 2018 to 2021. Pelvic fixation constructs in the study included traditional iliac screws, stacked S2-alar-iliac (S2AI screws), and triangular titanium implants. Results: Of the 494 patients with multiple implant constructs who met the inclusion criteria for this study, patients undergoing pelvic fixation surgery who received at least 2 implants increased by approximately 5% every 4 years (90.2%, 94.6%, 99.1% respectively). Over the 12-year span, the implementation of the S2AI screw grew 120%. Conclusion: At our institution, there is a trend toward using multiple bilateral implant constructs for pelvic fixation, with nearly a tenfold percentage increase between the most recent cohorts. These include iliac screws with S2AI screws, multiple stacked S2AI screws, and S2AI screws used in conjunction with triangular titanium implants in hopes to decrease implant failure.

2.
Global Spine J ; 14(2_suppl): 94S-109S, 2024 Feb.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38421328

RESUMEN

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. OBJECTIVES: To compare complication incidence in patients with or without the use of recombinant human Bone Morphogenic Protein-2 (BMP2) undergoing anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for degenerative conditions. METHODS: A systematic search of eight online databases was conducted using PRISMA guidelines. Inclusion criteria included English language studies with a minimum of 10 adult patients undergoing instrumented ACDF surgery for a degenerative spinal condition in which BMP2 was used in all patients or one of the treatment arms. Studies with patients undergoing circumferential fusions, with non-degenerative indications, or which did not report post-operative complication data were excluded. Patients with and without BMP2 were compared in terms of the incidence of dysphagia/dysphonia, anterior soft tissue complications (hematoma, seroma, infection, dysphagia/dysphonia), nonunion, medical complications, and new neurologic deficits. RESULTS: Of 1832 preliminary search results, 27 manuscripts were included. Meta-analysis revealed the relative risk of dysphagia or dysphonia (RR = 1.39, CI 95% 1.18 - 1.64, P = <.001), anterior soft tissue complications (RR = 1.43, CI 95% 1.25-1.64, P = <.001), and medical complications (RR = 1.32, CI 95% 1.06-1.66, P = .013) were statistically significant in the BMP2 group while the relative risk of non-union (RR = .5, CI 95% .23 - 1.13, P = .09) trended lower in the BMP2 group. Neurological deficit (RR = 1.06, CI 95% .82-1.37, P = .66), and additional medical complications (RR = 1.53, CI 95% .98-2.38, P = .06) were not found to be statistically different between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis identified a high rate of arthrodesis when BMP2 was used in ACDF, but confirmed increased rates of dysphagia and anterior soft tissue complications. Surgeons may consider reserving BMP2 implementation for cases with a high risk of non-union, and should be aware of the risk of airway compromise.

3.
Spine Deform ; 12(1): 141-148, 2024 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37610553

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Our institution employs a multimodal approach to manage postoperative pain after spine surgery. It involves continuous intravenous (IV) lidocaine until the morning of postoperative day two. This study aimed to determine the rate and reasons for early discontinuation of IV lidocaine in our spine patients. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart review and included pediatric patients who underwent ≥ 3-level spine surgery and received postoperative IV lidocaine from November 2019 to September 2022. For each case, we recorded the side effects of IV lidocaine, adverse events, time to discontinuation, and discontinuation rate. Subsequently, we used the same methodology to generate an adult cohort for comparison. RESULTS: We included 52 pediatric (18M:34F) and 50 (21M:29F) adult patients. The pediatric cohort's mean age was 14 years (8-18), and BMI 23.9 kg/m2 (13.0-42.8). The adult cohort's mean age was 61 years (29-82), and BMI 28.8 kg/m2 (17.2-44.1). IV lidocaine was discontinued prematurely in 21/52 (40.4%) of the pediatric cases and 26/50 (52.0%) of the adult cases (RR = 0.78, p = 0.2428). The side effects noted in the pediatric cases vary, including numbness, visual disturbance, and obtundation, but no seizures. The most common adverse events were fever and motor dysfunction. CONCLUSION: The early discontinuation rate of IV lidocaine use after spine surgery for children in our institution does not differ significantly from that of adults. The nature of the side effects and the reasons for discontinuation between the groups were similar. Thus, the safety profile of IV lidocaine for pediatric spine patients is comparable to adults.


Asunto(s)
Anestésicos Locales , Lidocaína , Adulto , Humanos , Niño , Adolescente , Persona de Mediana Edad , Lidocaína/efectos adversos , Anestésicos Locales/efectos adversos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Administración Intravenosa , Dolor Postoperatorio/tratamiento farmacológico
4.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38038970

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Osteotomies allow the restoration of appropriate sagittal alignment; however, closure of osteotomies can be challenging. Typical closure involves compressing pedicle screw heads across the rods, potentially causing screw loosening and failure. Motorized hinged operating tables are often used to assist with controlled closure of osteotomies without manual compression, but there is no published research quantifying the amount of correction provided solely by changes in the table angle. QUESTION/PURPOSE: What is the incremental amount of correction achieved by change in the table angle versus instrumented manipulation during osteotomy closure in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) with Smith-Petersen osteotomy? METHODS: Sixty-one patients undergoing Smith-Peterson osteotomy and bilateral TLIF using a motorized hinged table from October 2019 to March 2022 were prospectively enrolled. Two patients did not undergo surgery, two did not have table extension, and seven did not have data collected intraoperatively because of disruptions in research protocols owing to the coronavirus-19 pandemic. Fifty patients (24 male, 26 female) who underwent a total of 73 osteotomies were included in the final analysis. The mean ± standard deviation age was 61 ±11 years, and the mean BMI was 31 ± 6 kg/m2. Patients were positioned prone on the table and flexed to 10° for decompression, Smith-Petersen osteotomy, and TLIF. The table was then extended in 5° increments, and radiographs were taken until 10° of extension was achieved or the osteotomy was fully closed. Changes in segmental lordosis across the operative site for each 5° increment were measured to the nearest degree by two reviewers. Intraclass correlation coefficients for segmental lordosis measurements at each table angle change were calculated as 0.97 to 0.98, with all p values < 0.001, indicating excellent agreement. RESULTS: Table change from 10° to 5° yielded a mean segmental lordosis change of 1.9° ± 1.5° (73 osteotomies), 5° to 0° yielded a change of 1.3° ± 0.9° (73 osteotomies), 0° to -5° yielded a change of 1.3° ± 1.0° (69 osteotomies), and -5° to -10° yielded a change of 1.1° ± 1.3° (61 osteotomies). Rod placement and compression yielded a mean 1.8° ± 2.0° of additional segmental lordosis. CONCLUSION: Using a motorized hinged table facilitated an average of 5.6° of total segmental lordosis correction during controlled Smith-Peterson osteotomy closure without the need for cantilevering forces across spinal instrumentation. Surgeons can use this technique to reduce the compression forces needed to close osteotomies, which could eliminate a potential source of complications.Level of Evidence Level II, therapeutic study.

5.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37540797

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: We present a case series of proximal junctional failure due to a Chance-type fracture. METHODS: This is a retrospective review of patients who developed proximal junctional kyphosis because of Chance-type proximal junctional failure after spinal fusion for adult spinal deformity. RESULTS: Fifteen patients were identified (4M:11F). The average age was 61.4 years (range, 39 to 77). The mean time to fracture identification was 25.4 days (range, 3 to 65). The average number of levels instrumented was 6.7 (range, 2 to 17). No patients had antecedent trauma before fracture onset. In 67% of cases with a lumbar upper instrumented vertebra (UIV), there was overcorrection of lumbar lordosis (LL) and/or lower LL. The five cases with a lower thoracic UIV had undergone notable correction of preoperative thoracolumbar junction kyphosis. 14 of 15 patients were treated with extension of fusion. Pedicle screws at the fracture level were salvaged by changing to an anatomic trajectory. CONCLUSION: Continued pain at 6 to 12 weeks with radiographs showing an increased proximal junctional angle and cephalocaudal pedicle widening at the UIV should raise suspicion for this unique fracture pattern. A CT scan is recommended. Low bone density, LL and/or lower LL overcorrection, and selection of lower thoracic UIV in the setting of notable thoracolumbar junction correction may contribute to fracture risk.


Asunto(s)
Fracturas Óseas , Cifosis , Lordosis , Adulto , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Cifosis/diagnóstico por imagen , Cifosis/etiología , Cifosis/cirugía , Lordosis/cirugía , Vértebras Lumbares/diagnóstico por imagen , Vértebras Lumbares/cirugía , Vértebras Torácicas/diagnóstico por imagen , Vértebras Torácicas/cirugía
6.
Spine Deform ; 11(3): 677-683, 2023 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36735159

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Adequate bone mineral density (BMD) is necessary for success in spine surgery. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the gold standard in determining BMD but may give spuriously high values. Hounsfield units (HU) from computed tomography (CT) may provide a more accurate depiction of the focal BMD encountered during spine surgery. Our objective is to determine the discrepancy rate between DXA and CT BMD determinations and how often DXA overestimates BMD compared to CT. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 93 patients with both DXA and CT within 6 months. DXA lumbar spine and overall T scores were classified as osteoporotic (T Score ≤ - 2.5) or non-osteoporotic (T Score > -2.5). L1 vertebral body HU were classified as osteoporotic or non-osteoporotic using cutoff thresholds of either ≤ 135 HU or ≤ 110 HU. Corresponding DXA and HU classifications were compared to determine disagreement and overestimation rates. RESULTS: Using lumbar T scores, the CT vs DXA disagreement rate was 40-54% depending on the HU threshold. DXA overestimated BMD 97-100% of the time compared to CT. Using overall DXA T scores, the disagreement rate was 33-47% with DXA greater than CT 74-87% of the time. In the sub-cohort of 10 patients with very low HU (HU < 80), DXA overestimated BMD compared to CT in every instance. CONCLUSIONS: There is a large discrepancy between DXA and CT BMD determinations. DXA frequently overestimates regional BMD encountered during spine surgery compared with CT. While DXA remains the gold standard in determining BMD, CT may play an important role in defining the focal BMD pertinent to spine surgery.


Asunto(s)
Densidad Ósea , Osteoporosis , Humanos , Absorciometría de Fotón/métodos , Osteoporosis/diagnóstico por imagen , Estudios Retrospectivos , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos X/métodos
7.
J Neurosurg Spine ; 38(1): 98-106, 2023 01 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36057123

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: There are few prior reports of acute pelvic instrumentation failure in spinal deformity surgery. The objective of this study was to determine if a previously identified mechanism and rate of pelvic fixation failure were present across multiple institutions, and to determine risk factors for these types of failures. METHODS: Thirteen academic medical centers performed a retrospective review of 18 months of consecutive adult spinal fusions extending 3 or more levels, which included new pelvic screws at the time of surgery. Acute pelvic fixation failure was defined as occurring within 6 months of the index surgery and requiring surgical revision. RESULTS: Failure occurred in 37 (5%) of 779 cases and consisted of either slippage of the rods or displacement of the set screws from the screw tulip head (17 cases), screw shaft fracture (9 cases), screw loosening (9 cases), and/or resultant kyphotic fracture of the sacrum (6 cases). Revision strategies involved new pelvic fixation and/or multiple rod constructs. Six patients (16%) who underwent revision with fewer than 4 rods to the pelvis sustained a second acute failure, but no secondary failures occurred when at least 4 rods were used. In the univariate analysis, the magnitude of surgical correction was higher in the failure cohort (higher preoperative T1-pelvic angle [T1PA], presence of a 3-column osteotomy; p < 0.05). Uncorrected postoperative deformity increased failure risk (pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch > 10°, higher postoperative T1PA; p < 0.05). Use of pelvic screws less than 8.5 mm in diameter also increased the likelihood of failure (p < 0.05). In the multivariate analysis, a larger preoperative global deformity as measured by T1PA was associated with failure, male patients were more likely to experience failure than female patients, and there was a strong association with implant manufacturer (p < 0.05). Anterior column support with an L5-S1 interbody fusion was protective against failure (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Acute catastrophic failures involved large-magnitude surgical corrections and likely resulted from high mechanical strain on the pelvic instrumentation. Patients with large corrections may benefit from anterior structural support placed at the most caudal motion segment and multiple rods connecting to more than 2 pelvic fixation points. If failure occurs, salvage with a minimum of 4 rods and 4 pelvic fixation points can be successful.


Asunto(s)
Lordosis , Fusión Vertebral , Humanos , Masculino , Adulto , Femenino , Reoperación , Vértebras Lumbares/cirugía , Pelvis/cirugía , Lordosis/cirugía , Fusión Vertebral/métodos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Ilion/cirugía
8.
J Neurosurg Spine ; 36(1): 86-92, 2022 Jan 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34507297

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Pelvic fixation enhances long constructs during deformity surgery. Subsequent loosening of iliac screws and pain at the pelvis occur in as many as 29% of patients. Concomitant sacroiliac (SI) fusion may prevent potential pain and failure. The objective of this study was to describe a novel surgical technique and a single institution's experience using bilateral SI fusion during adult deformity surgery with S2-alar-iliac (S2AI) screws and triangular titanium rods (TTRs) placed with navigation. METHODS: The authors reviewed open SI joint fusions with TTR performed between August 2019 and March 2020. All patients underwent lumbosacral fusion through a midline approach and bilateral S2AI pelvic fixation in the caudal teardrop, followed by TTR placement just proximal and cephalad to the S2AI screws using intraoperative CT imaging guidance. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients were identified who received 42 TTRs, ranging in size from 7.0 × 65 mm to 7.0 × 90 mm. Three TTRs (7%) were malpositioned intraoperatively, and each was successfully repositioned during index surgery without negative sequelae. All breaches occurred in a medial and cephalad direction into the pelvis. Incremental operative time for adding TTR averaged 8 minutes and 33 seconds per implant. CONCLUSIONS: Image-guided open SI joint fusion with TTR during lumbosacral fusion is technically feasible. The bony corridor for implant placement is narrower cephalad, and implants tend to deviate medially into the pelvis. Detection of malpositioned implant is aided with intraoperative CT, but this can be salvaged. A prospective randomized clinical trial is underway that will better inform the impact of this technique on patient outcomes.


Asunto(s)
Fijadores Internos , Articulación Sacroiliaca/cirugía , Curvaturas de la Columna Vertebral/cirugía , Fusión Vertebral/instrumentación , Titanio , Adulto , Anciano , Estudios de Cohortes , Estudios de Factibilidad , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Radiografía , Curvaturas de la Columna Vertebral/diagnóstico por imagen , Fusión Vertebral/métodos
9.
J Neurosurg Spine ; 36(1): 53-61, 2022 Jan 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34479206

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Pelvic fixation with S2-alar-iliac (S2AI) screws is an established technique in adult deformity surgery. The authors' objective was to report the incidence and risk factors for an underreported acute failure mechanism of S2AI screws. METHODS: The authors retrospectively reviewed a consecutive series of ambulatory adults with fusions extending 3 or more levels, and which included S2AI screws. Acute failure of S2AI screws was defined as occurring within 6 months of the index surgery and requiring surgical revision. RESULTS: Failure occurred in 6 of 125 patients (5%) and consisted of either slippage of the rods or displacement of the set screws from the S2AI tulip head, with resultant kyphotic fracture. All failures occurred within 6 weeks postoperatively. Revision with a minimum of 4 rods connecting to 4 pelvic fixation points was successful. Two of 3 (66%) patients whose revision had less fixation sustained a second failure. Patients who experienced failure were younger (56.5 years vs 65 years, p = 0.03). The magnitude of surgical correction was higher in the failure cohort (number of levels fused, change in lumbar lordosis, change in T1-pelvic angle, and change in coronal C7 vertical axis, each p < 0.05). In the multivariate analysis, younger patient age and change in lumbar lordosis were independently associated with increased failure risk (p < 0.05 for each). There was a trend toward the presence of a transitional S1-2 disc being a risk factor (OR 8.8, 95% CI 0.93-82.6). Failure incidence was the same across implant manufacturers (p = 0.3). CONCLUSIONS: All failures involved large-magnitude correction and resulted from stresses that exceeded the failure loads of the set plugs in the S2AI tulip, with resultant rod displacement and kyphotic fractures. Patients with large corrections may benefit from 4 total S2AI screws at the time of the index surgery, particularly if a transitional segment is present. Salvage with a minimum of 4 rods and 4 pelvic fixation points can be successful.


Asunto(s)
Tornillos Óseos/efectos adversos , Ilion , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Falla de Prótesis/efectos adversos , Sacro , Curvaturas de la Columna Vertebral/cirugía , Fusión Vertebral/instrumentación , Anciano , Femenino , Humanos , Incidencia , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/diagnóstico por imagen , Reoperación , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Curvaturas de la Columna Vertebral/diagnóstico por imagen , Fusión Vertebral/efectos adversos
10.
JBJS Essent Surg Tech ; 12(4): e21.00044, 2022.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36743282

RESUMEN

Sacropelvic fixation is a continually evolving technique in the treatment of adult spinal deformity. The 2 most widely utilized techniques are iliac screw fixation and S2-alar-iliac (S2AI) screw fixation1-3. The use of these techniques at the base of long fusion constructs, with the goal of providing a solid base to maintain surgical correction, has improved fusion rates and decreased rates of revision4. Description: The procedure is performed with the patient under general anesthesia in the prone position and with use of 3D computer navigation based on intraoperative cone-beam computed tomography (CT) imaging. A standard open posterior approach with a midline incision and subperiosteal exposure of the proximal spine and sacrum is performed. Standard S2AI screw placement is performed. The S2AI starting point is on the dorsal sacrum 2 to 3 mm above the S2 foramen, aiming as caudal as possible in the teardrop. A navigated awl is utilized to establish the screw trajectory, passing through the sacrum, across the sacroiliac (SI) joint, and into the ilium. The track is serially tapped with use of navigated taps, 6.5 mm followed by 9.5 mm, under power. The screw is then placed under power with use of a navigated screwdriver.Proper placement of the caudal implant is vital as it allows for ample room for subsequent instrumentation. The additional point of pelvic fixation can be an S2AI screw or a triangular titanium rod (TTR). This additional implant is placed cephalad to the trajectory of the S2AI screw. A starting point 2 to 3 mm proximal to the S2AI screw tulip head on the sacral ala provides enough clearance and also helps to keep the implant low enough in the teardrop that it is likely to stay within bone. More proximal starting points should be avoided as they will result in a cephalad breach.For procedures with an additional point of pelvic fixation, the cephalad S2AI screw can be placed using the previously described method. For placement of the TTR, the starting point is marked with a burr. A navigated drill guide is utilized to first pass a drill bit to create a pilot hole, followed by a guide pin proximal to the S2AI screw in the teardrop. Drilling the tip of the guide pin into the distal, lateral iliac cortex prevents pin backout during the subsequent steps. A cannulated drill is then passed over the guide pin, traveling from the sacral ala and breaching the SI joint into the pelvis. A navigated broach is then utilized to create a track for the implant. The flat side of the triangular broach is turned toward the S2AI screw in order to help the implant sit as close as possible to the screw and to allow the implant to be as low as possible in the teardrop. The navigation system is utilized to choose the maximum possible implant length. The TTR is then passed over the guide pin and impacted to the appropriate depth. Multiplanar post-placement fluoroscopic images and an additional intraoperative CT scan of the pelvis are obtained to verify instrumentation position. Alternatives: The use of spinopelvic fixation in long constructs is widely accepted, and various techniques have been described in the past1. Alternatives to stacked S2AI screws or S2AI with TTR for SI joint fusion include traditional iliac screw fixation with offset connectors, modified iliac fixation, sacral fixation alone, and single S2AI screw fixation. Rationale: The lumbosacral junction is the foundation of long spinal constructs and is known to be a point of high mechanical strain5-7. Although pelvic instrumentation has been utilized to increase construct stiffness and fusion rates, pelvic fixation failure is frequently reported8,9. At our institution, we identified a 5% acute pelvic fixation failure rate over an 18-month period10. In a subsequent multicenter retrospective series, a similar 5% acute pelvic fixation failure rate was also reported11. In response to these findings, our institution changed its pelvic fixation strategies to incorporate multiple points of pelvic fixation. From our experience, utilization of multiple pelvic fixation points has decreased acute failure. In addition to preventing instrumentation failure, S2AI screws are lower-profile, which decreases the complication of implant prominence associated with traditional iliac screws. S2AI screw heads are also more in line with the pedicle screw heads, which decreases the need for excessive rod bending and connectors.The use of the techniques has been described in case reports and imaging studies12-14, but until now has not been visually represented. Here, we provide technical and visual presentation of the placement of stacked S2AI screws or open SI joint fusion with a TTR above an S2AI screw. Expected Outcomes: Pelvic fixation provides increased construct stiffness compared with sacral fixation alone15-17 and has shown better rates of fusion4. However, failure rates of up to 35%8,9 have been reported, and our own institution identified a 5% acute pelvic fixation failure rate10. In response to this, the multiple pelvic fixation strategy (stacked S2AI screws or S2AI and TTR for SI joint fusion) has been more widely utilized. In our experience utilizing multiple points of pelvic fixation, we have noticed a decreased rate of pelvic fixation failure and are in the process of reporting these findings18,19. Important Tips: The initial trajectory of the caudal S2AI screw needs to be as low as possible within the teardrop, just proximal to the sciatic notch.The starting point for the cephalad implant should be 2 to 3 mm proximal to the S2AI screw tulip head. This placement provides enough clearance and helps to contain the implant in bone.More proximal starting points may result in cephalad breach of the TTR.The use of a reverse-threaded Kirschner wire helps to prevent pin backout while drilling and broaching for TTR placement.If malpositioning of the TTR is found on imaging, removal and redirection is technically feasible. Acronyms and Abbreviations: S2AI = S2-alar-iliacTTR = triangular titanium rodCT = computed tomographyAP = anteroposteriorOR = operating roomSI = sacroiliacDRMAS = dual rod multi-axial screwK-wire = Kirschner wireDVT = deep vein thrombosisPE = pulmonary embolism.

11.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33204578

RESUMEN

Minimally invasive sacroiliac (SI) joint fusion is indicated for low back pain from the SI joint that is due to degenerative sacroiliitis and/or sacroiliac joint disruption. This technique is safe and effective in relieving pain uncontrolled by nonoperative management1-4. There is some controversy, but there continues to be increasing evidence of effectiveness. DESCRIPTION: This procedure is performed, with the patient under general anesthesia and in the prone position, using fluoroscopy or 3-dimensional (3D) navigation such as cone-beam computed tomographic (CT) imaging. After navigation setup, a navigated probe is used to approximate the desired location of each implant and trajectory. These positions are marked on the skin, and the skin is incised. A 3 to 5-cm lateral incision is made. The gluteal fascia is bluntly dissected to the outer table of the ilium. A guide pin is passed across the SI joint and into the center of the sacrum lateral to the neural foramina, which is confirmed with imaging. This is then drilled and broached. Triangular titanium rods are placed. Typically, 3 implants are placed, 2 in S1 and 1 in S2. Multiplanar postplacement imaging of the pelvis is obtained. The wound is irrigated and closed in layers. ALTERNATIVES: Nonsurgical alternatives have been reported to include pharmacological therapies, such as nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, therapeutic SI joint blocks5, and physical therapy, such as core stabilization, orthotics (SI belts), and radiofrequency ablation1,2,6-8. The surgical alternative is an open anterior or posterior approach with SI joint arthrodesis. The anterior approach differs by the resection of the SI joint cartilage, the use of a plate or screws across the joint for stabilization, and the packing of bone graft to facilitate fusion9. These are more morbid and have a much longer recovery. RATIONALE: Conservative management for SI joint pain is inadequate for all patients. Having 3 of 5 positive physical examination maneuvers7, having confirmatory diagnostic block(s)10, and ruling out the hip or spine as the pain generator provide a success rate of >80%. These patients have early and sustained clinically important and significantly improved outcomes across varying measures compared with conservative treatment1-4,11,12. EXPECTED OUTCOMES: Patients can expect to experience decreased pain, reduced disability, increased daily function, and improved quality of life soon after the procedure is performed. These patients typically have an improvement of ≥50% in the Oswestry Disability Index score and a clinically significant decrease in visual analog pain scores13. The procedure appears durable through at least 5 years14. Complete pain relief is rare, but clinically important improvement is typical. IMPORTANT TIPS: Proper setup of the navigation system or fluoroscopy is needed to ensure accurate starting points.For 3D navigation, use a reference pin in the contralateral posterior superior iliac spine.Although navigation is used, radiographic images are made periodically to confirm proper placement of guide pins and implants. Images provide the greatest benefit when establishing navigation, after guide-pin placement when an outlet view allows for evaluation of pin depth, and after implant placement to confirm proper placement.Blood loss is generally low, but care should be taken to avoid vascular injury. Although rare, improper placement has led to injury of the superior gluteal artery15 and iliac artery16. This can be avoided by staying in bone.Proper placement of the implant is imperative in this procedure. There is the potential for nerve injury with improper placement of the implant: an L5 nerve injury if the implant is too ventral or an S1 or S2 nerve injury if the implant is too deep and into the foramen. Revision surgery is commonly due to nerve root impingement and/or malpositioning.Preoperative 3D imaging is indicated when it is necessary to rule out differential diagnoses that mimic SI joint pain. This enables the surgeon to rule out intrapelvic pathology, assess sacral bone density17, and identify dysmorphic sacra or transitional vertebrae.

12.
JBJS Case Connect ; 10(4): e20.00140, 2020 10 16.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33512935

RESUMEN

CASE: We present a long-term follow-up on a woman with otospondylomegaepiphyseal dysplasia (OSMED). At the age of 46 years, she is one of the oldest patients with the syndrome in the literature to date. We focus on the musculoskeletal anatomy and orthopaedic interventions over her lifetime. CONCLUSION: OSMED is a very rare syndrome. Arthritis and joint pains presented in her early adolescence and progressed to the point of requiring joint replacements by her 20s. Early intervention and monitoring improved the quality of life for this patient.


Asunto(s)
Enanismo/diagnóstico por imagen , Osteocondrodisplasias/diagnóstico por imagen , Enanismo/cirugía , Femenino , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Osteocondrodisplasias/cirugía , Radiografía , Fusión Vertebral
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA