RESUMEN
Introduction: Following surgical treatment for adult spinal deformity (ASD) there is an increased risk of revision surgery due to mechanical failure or pseudarthrosis. Demineralized cortical fibers (DCF) were introduced at our institution aiming to reduce the risk of pseudarthrosis after ASD surgery. Research question: We wanted to investigate the effect of DCF on postoperative pseudarthrosis compared with allogenic bone graft in ASD surgery without three-column osteotomies (3CO). Materials & Methods: All patients undergoing ASD surgery between January 1, 2010 to June 31, 2020 were included in this interventional study with historical controls. Patients with current or previous 3CO were excluded. Before February 1, 2017, patients undergoing surgery received auto- and allogenic bone graft (non-DCF group) whilst patients after received DCF in addition to autologous bone graft (DCF group). Patients were followed for at least two years. The primary outcome was radiographic or CT-verified postoperative pseudarthrosis requiring revision surgery. Results: We included 50 patients in the DCF group and 85 patients in the non-DCF group for final analysis. Pseudarthrosis requiring revision surgery at two-year follow-up occurred in seven (14%) patients in the DCF group compared with 28 (33%) patients in the non-DCF group (p â= â0.016). The difference was statistically significant, corresponding to a relative risk of 0.43 (95%CI: 0.21-0.94) in favor of the DCF group. Conclusion: We assessed the use of DCF in patients undergoing ASD surgery without 3CO. Our results suggest that the use of DCF was associated with a considerable decreased risk of postoperative pseudarthrosis requiring revision surgery.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE: To assess the effect of demineralized cortical fibers (DCF) on postoperative pseudarthrosis requiring revision surgery in patients undergoing pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO) for adult spinal deformity (ASD). METHODS: The use of DCF was introduced across all procedures in 2017 and subsequent patients undergoing PSO surgery were prospectively and consecutively registered. Following sample-size estimation, a retrospective cohort was also registered undergoing the same procedure immediately prior to the implementation of DCF. The non-DCF group underwent surgery with ABG. Minimum follow-up was 2 years in both groups. The main outcome was postoperative pseudarthrosis, either CT-verified or verified intraoperatively during revision surgery due to rod breakage and assessed using Kaplan-Meier survival analyses. RESULTS: A total of 48 patients were included in the DCF group and 76 in the non-DCF group. The DCF group had more frequently undergone previous spine surgery (60% vs 36%) and had shorter follow-up (32 ± 2 vs 40 ± 7 months). Pseudarthrosis occurred in 7 (15%) patients in the DCF group and 31 (41%) in the non-DCF group, corresponding to a relative risk increase of 2.6 (95%CI 1.3-2.4, P < 0.01). 1-KM survival analyses, taking time to event into account and thus the difference in follow-up, also showed increased pseudarthrosis in the non-DCF group (log-rank P = 0.022). Similarly, multivariate logistic regression adjusted for age, instrumented levels and sacral fusion was also with significantly increased odds of pseudarthrosis in the non-DCF group (OR: 4.3, 95%CI: 1.7-11.3, P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: We found considerable and significant reductions in pseudarthrosis following PSO surgery with DCF compared to non-DCF. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
