Management of Pathological Thoracolumbar Vertebral Fractures in Patients With Multiple Myeloma: Multidisciplinary Recommendations.

STUDY DESIGN: Mutlidisciplinary consensus recommendations for patients suffering from multiple myeloma (MM) involvement of the spinal column by the Spine Section of the German Association of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgeons. OBJECTIVE: To provide a comprehensive multidisciplinary diagnostic and therapeutic approach and to summarize the current literature on the management of pathological thoracolumbar vertebral fractures in patients with multiple myeloma. METHODS: Multidisciplinary recommendations using a classical consensus process provided by radiation oncologists, medical oncologists, orthopaedic- and trauma surgeons. A narrative literature review of the current diagnostic and treatment strategies was conducted. RESULTS: Treatment decision has to be driven by a multidisciplinary team of oncologists, radiotherapists and spine surgeons. When considering surgery in MM patients, differing factors compared to other secondary spinal lesions have to be included into the decision process: probable neurological deterioration, the stage of the disease and prognosis, patient's general condition, localization and number of the lesions as well as patient's own wishes or expectations. Aiming to improve quality of life, the major goal of surgical treatment is to preserve mobility by reducing pain, secure neurological function and stability. CONCLUSION: The goal of surgery is primarily to improve quality of life by restoring stability and neurological function. Interventions with an increased risk of complications due to MM-associated immunodeficiency must be avoided whenever feasible to allow early systemic treatment. Hence, treatment decisions should be based on a multidisciplinary team that considers patient's constitution and prognosis.

Treatment and Outcome of Osteoporotic Thoracolumbar Vertebral Body Fractures With Deformation of Both Endplates With or Without Posterior Wall Involvement (OF 4): Short-Term Results from the Prospective EOFTT Multicenter Study.

STUDY DESIGN: Multicenter prospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To analyse therapeutical strategies applied to osteoporotic thoracolumbar OF 4 injuries, to assess related complications and clinical outcome. METHODS: A multicenter prospective cohort study (EOFTT) including 518 consecutive patients who were treated for an Osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture (OVCF). For the present study, only patients with OF 4 fractures were analysed. Outcome parameters were complications, Visual Analogue Scale, Oswestry Disability Questionnaire, Timed Up & Go test, EQ-5D 5L, and Barthel Index after a minimum follow-up of 6 weeks. RESULTS: A total of 152 (29%) patients presented with OF 4 fractures with a mean age of 76 years (range 41-97). The most common treatment was short-segment posterior stabilization (51%; hybrid stabilization in 36%). Mean follow up was 208 days (±131 days), mean ODI was 30 ± 21. Dorsoventral stabilized patients were younger compared to the other groups (P < .001) and had significant better TuG compared to hybrid stabilization (P = .049). The other clinical outcomes did not differ in the therapy strategies (VAS pain: P = 1.000, ODI: P > .602, Barthel: P > .252, EQ-5D 5L index value: P > .610, VAS-EQ-5D 5L: P = 1.000). The inpatient complication rate was 8% after conservative and 16% after surgical treatment. During follow-up period 14% of conservatively treated patients and 3% of surgical treated patients experienced neurological deficits. CONCLUSIONS: Conservative therapy of OF 4 injuries seems to be viable option in patients with only moderate symptoms. Hybrid stabilization was the dominant treatment strategy leading to promising clinical short-term results. Stand-alone cement augmentation seems to be a valid alternative in selected cases.

Treatment and Outcome of Osteoporotic Thoracolumbar Vertebral Fractures With Anterior or Posterior Tension Band Failure (OF 5): Short-Term Results From the Prospective EOFTT Multicenter Study.

STUDY DESIGN: Subgroup analysis of a multicenter prospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To analyse surgical strategies applied to osteoporotic thoracolumbar osteoporotic fracture (OF) 5 injuries with anterior or posterior tension band failure and to assess related complications and clinical outcome. METHODS: A multicenter prospective cohort study (EOFTT) was conducted at 17 spine centers including 518 consecutive patients who were treated for an osteoporotic vertebral fracture (OVF). For the present study, only patients with OF 5 fractures were analysed. Outcome parameters were complications, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (ODI), Timed Up & Go test (TUG), EQ-5D 5L, and Barthel Index. RESULTS: In total, 19 patients (78 ± 7 years, 13 female) were analysed. Operative treatment consisted of long-segment posterior instrumentation in 9 cases and short-segment posterior instrumentation in 10 cases. Pedicle screws were augmented in 68 %, augmentation of the fractured vertebra was performed in 42%, and additional anterior reconstruction was done in 21 %. Two patients (11 %) received short-segment posterior instrumentation without either anterior reconstruction or cement-augmentation of the fractured vertebra. No surgical or major complications occurred, but general postoperative complications were observed in 45%. At a follow-up of mean 20 ± 10 weeks (range, 12 to 48 weeks), patients showed significant improvements in all functional outcome parameters. CONCLUSIONS: In this analysis of patients with type OF 5 fractures, surgical stabilization was the treatment of choice and lead to significant short-term improvement in terms of functional outcome and quality of life despite a high general complication rate.

Geriatric Odontoid Fractures: Treatment Algorithms of the German Society for Orthopaedics and Trauma Based on Expert Consensus and a Systematic Review.

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review/expert consensus. OBJECTIVES: Fractures of the axis represent the most frequent injury of the spine in elderly patients. Both, operative and non-operative treatment are associated with a high rate of complications and mortality. The aim of this article was to summarize the current literature on the management of odontoid fractures in geriatric patients and to weigh it based on an expert consensus process. METHODS: In a joint consensus process, members of the Spine Section of the German Orthopaedic and Trauma Society (DGOU) aimed to formulate recommendations for the diagnostic workup and treatment of odontoid fractures in geriatric patients. Based on the previously published recommendations, this article is an updated version with incorporating a systematic review of the recent literature. RESULTS: Based on the new data available, the recommendations established in the initial consensus process were adapted. CONCLUSIONS: Computed tomography represents the diagnostic standard for patients with suspected injuries of the upper cervical spine. Anderson/D'Alonzo odontoid fractures type 1, non-displaced type 2, and type 3 can be treated conservatively. Even non-unions do not necessarily result in poor clinical outcome. In Anderson/D'Alonzo type 2 fractures, surgical therapy offers the advantage of relatively safe osseous healing with no increased complication rate even in elderly patients and can thus be recommended. In very high aged patients, however, a case-by-case decision should be made. When surgical stabilization of osteoporotic odontoid fractures is indicated, posterior techniques are biomechanically advantageous and can be considered the standard.

Combined Odontoid (C2) and Atlas (C1) Fractures in Geriatric Patients: A Systematic Review and Treatment Recommendation.

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic overview of the pathogenesis and the treatment options of combined odontoid and atlas fractures in geriatric patients. METHODS: This review is based on articles retrieved by a systematic search in the PubMed and Web of Science databases for articles published until February 2021 dealing with combination fractures of C1 and C2 in geriatric patients. RESULTS: Altogether, 438 articles were retrieved from the literature search. A total of 430 articles were excluded. The remaining eight original articles were included in this systematic review depicting the topics pathogenesis, non-operative treatment, posterior approach, and anterior approach. The overall level of evidence of the studies is low. CONCLUSION: Combined odontoid and atlas fractures in the geriatric population are commonly caused by simple falls and seem to be associated with atlanto-odontoid osteoarthritis. Non-operative treatment with a cervical orthosis is a feasible treatment option in the majority of patients with stable C2 fractures. In case of surgery posterior C1 and C 2 stabilization and anterior triple or quadruple screw fixation are possible techniques. Some patients may also deserve an occipito-cervical fusion. A possible treatment algorithm is proposed.

Mediating Medical Comorbidities in Geriatric Patients Undergoing Surgery for OVCF: From Preoperative Screening to Risk and Outcomes Optimization.

OBJECTIVES: Osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCF) are a common increasing entity in elderly patients and represent a tremendous economic burden. Surgical treatment is related to high complication rates and little is known about patient-specific and internal risk factors associated with poor clinical results. METHODS: We carried out a comprehensive, systematic literature search according to the PRISMA checklist and algorithm. Risk factors for perioperative complications, for early inpatient readmission, for the duration of the hospital stay, the hospital mortality, the total mortality and the clinical result were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 739 potentially usable studies were identified. After considering all inclusion and exclusion criteria, 15 studies with 15,515 patients were included. Non-adjustable risk factors were age >90 years (OR 3.27), male gender (OR 1.41), BMI less than 18.5 kg/m2 (OR 3.97), ASA score >3 (OR 2.7), activity of daily live (ADL) (OR 1.52), dependence (OR 5.68), inpatient admission status (OR 3.22), Parkinson disease (OR 3.63) and disseminated cancer (OR 2.98). Adjustable factors were insufficient kidney function (GFR <60 mL/min, and Creatinine Clearance below 60 mg/dl) (OR 4.4), nutrition status (hypalbuminemia (<3.5 g/dl)), liver function (OR 8.9) and further cardiac and pulmonary comorbidities. DISCUSSION: We identified a couple of non-adjustable risk factors, which should be considered preoperatively in terms of risk assessment. However, even more important were adjustable factors that can be influenced preoperatively. In conclusion, we recommend a perioperative interdisciplinary cooperation, especially with geriatricians, to achieve the best possible clinical results in geriatric patients undergoing surgery for OVCF.

Avoiding Spinal Implant Failures in Osteoporotic Patients: A Narrative Review.

STUDY DESIGN: Narrative review. OBJECTIVES: With an aging population, the prevalence of osteoporosis is continuously rising. As osseous integrity is crucial for bony fusion and implant stability, previous studies have shown osteoporosis to be associated with an increased risk for implant failure and higher reoperation rates after spine surgery. Thus, our review's purpose was to provide an update of evidence-based solutions in the surgical treatment of osteoporosis patients. METHODS: We summarize the existing literature regarding changes associated with decreased bone mineral density (BMD) and resulting biomechanical implications for the spine as well as multidisciplinary treatment strategies to avoid implant failures in osteoporotic patients. RESULTS: Osteoporosis is caused by an uncoupling of the bone remodeling cycle based on an unbalancing of bone resorption and formation and resulting reduced BMD. The reduction in trabecular structure, increased porosity of cancellous bone and decreased cross-linking between trabeculae cause a higher risk of complications after spinal implant-based surgeries. Thus, patients with osteoporosis require special planning considerations, including adequate preoperative evaluation and optimization. Surgical strategies aim towards maximizing screw pull-out strength, toggle resistance, as well as primary and secondary construct stability. CONCLUSIONS: As osteoporosis plays a crucial role in the fate of patients undergoing spine surgery, surgeons need to be aware of the specific implications of low BMD. While there still is no consensus on the best course of treatment, multidisciplinary preoperative assessment and adherence to specific surgical principles help reduce the rate of implant-related complications.

Clinical Evaluation of the Osteoporotic Fracture Treatment Score (OF-Score): Results of the Evaluation of the Osteoporotic Fracture Classification, Treatment Score and Therapy Recommendations (EOFTT) Study.

STUDY DESIGN: Multicenter prospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: The study aims to validate the recently developed OF score for treatment decisions in patients with osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCF). METHODS: This is a prospective multicenter cohort study (EOFTT) in 17 spine centers. All consecutive patients with OVCF were included. The decision for conservative or surgical therapy was made by the treating physician independent of the OF score recommendation. Final decisions were compared to the recommendations given by the OF score. Outcome parameters were complications, Visual Analogue Scale, Oswestry Disability Questionnaire, Timed Up & Go test, EQ-5D 5 L, and Barthel Index. RESULTS: In total, 518 patients (75.3% female, age 75 ± 10) years were included. 344 (66%) patients received surgical treatment. 71% of patients were treated following the score recommendations. For an OF score cut-off value of 6.5, the sensitivity and specificity to predict actual treatment were 60% and 68% (AUC .684, P < .001). During hospitalization overall 76 (14.7%) complications occurred. The mean follow-up rate and time were 92% and 5 ± 3.5 months, respectively. While all patients in the study cohort improved in clinical outcome parameters, the effect size was significantly less in the patients not treated in line with the OF score's recommendation. Eight (3%) patients needed revision surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated according to the OF score's recommendations showed favorable short-term clinical results. Noncompliance with the score resulted in more pain and impaired functional outcome and quality of life. The OF score is a reliable and save tool to aid treatment decision in OVCF.

When to remove? Evaluation of postoperative drainage volume after single-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion.

Study design: prospective, observational. Background: Wound drainage's indwelling duration and general use are the centre of ongoing discussion. The aim of our prospective observational study was to evaluate the total drainage volume postoperatively and its course after lumbar interbody fusion surgeries to define an ideal point in time for drainage removal. Methods: We included all patients who underwent monosegmental lumbar interbody fusion via transforaminal or posterior lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF/PLIF). After application of the exclusion criteria, 27 patients were included in our study. Drainage volume was measured three times a day and at the time of drain removal. Results: The PLIF group reached higher total drainage volume (337.14 ml) than the TLIF group (215.5 ml) (p = 0.047. Drainage volume's plateau was reached after 33.0 h (±1.8 h) in the TLIF group and 25.3 h (±1.7 h) in the PLIF group following surgery. Conclusions: Our study shows, that drainage volume did not increase significantly after the evening of the first postoperative day at latest. This was on average 33.0 h after surgery. Therefore, extraction of the drainage tube hereafter can be assumed to be safe.

[Safety culture in the operating room-an overview]. / Sicherheitskultur im Operationssaal ­ Eine Übersicht.

Reduction and treatment of complications can be achieved through improvement of treatment options, complication management, and the abilities to remedy complications, and through the minimization of errors, respectively. Human-medical error represents an inappropriate treatment, for instance, not administered carefully, correctly or in a timely manner. It can cover all areas of physician-related and medical activities with regard to prophylaxis, diagnosis, selection of treatment modalities, and post-operative care. Different options to minimise errors are the improvement of organizational measures, technical skills and non-technical skills, like social competences. On the basis of a narrative literature research, systems and methods were gathered to describe the possibilities of error identification, research into the causes, and the avoidance of errors.

Closed-suction drainage in thoracolumbar spinal surgery-clinical routine without evidence? a systematic review.

PURPOSE: The considered benefit of surgical drain use after spinal surgery is to prevent local accumulation of a haematoma by decompressing the closed space in the approach of the surgical site. In this context, the aim of the present systematic review was to prove the benefit of the routine use of closed-suction drains. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive systematic review of the literature according to the Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) checklist and algorithm. RESULTS: Following the literature search, 401 potentially eligible investigations were identified. Eventually, a total of 24 studies with 8579 participants were included. Negative suction drainage led to a significantly higher volume of drainage fluid. Drainage duration longer than 72 h may be associated with a higher incidence of Surgical side infections (SSI); however, accompanying antibiotic treatment is unnecessary. Regarding postoperative haematoma and neurological complications, no evidence exists concerning their prevention. Hospital stay length and related costs may be elevated in patients with drainage but appear to depend on surgery type. CONCLUSIONS: With regard to the existing literature, the use of closed-suction drainage in elective thoracolumbar spinal surgery is not associated with any proven benefit for patients and cannot decrease postoperative complications.

Relationship Between the OF Classification and Radiological Outcome of Osteoporotic Vertebral Fractures After Kyphoplasty.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVES: The OF classification is a new classification for osteoporotic vertebral fractures. The aim of this study was to clarify the relationship between preoperative OF subgroups and the postoperative outcome after kyphoplasty in patients with such fractures. METHODS: Patients who underwent kyphoplasty of a single osteoporotic vertebral fracture were included and divided into groups according to the OF subgroups. Pre- and postoperative plain radiographs were analyzed in regard to the restoration of vertebral body height and local kyphotic angle (LKA). Additionally, clinical data including pre- and postoperative Visual Analogue Scale pain scores was documented. The clinical and radiological results were compared pre- and postoperatively within groups and between groups. RESULTS: A total of 156 patients from OF subgroups 2 to 4 were included (OF 2: n = 58; OF 3: n = 36; OF 4: n = 62). Patients from all groups experienced significant pain relief postoperatively (P < .001). Patients with OF 2 fractures showed a repositioning of the vertebral body height in the anterior and middle portions (both P < .001), but no significant improvement in LKA. For OF 3 and 4 fractures, there was a significant restoration of vertebral body height (P < .001 for both) and a significant improvement of LKA (P < .001 for both). The highest average restoration was noted in the OF 4 group. CONCLUSIONS: A higher OF subgroup is related to a higher radiological benefit from kyphoplasty. This confirms that the OF classification is an appropriate tool for the preoperative assessment of osteoporotic fractures.

Osteoporotic mid-thoracic vertebral body fractures: what are the differences compared to fractures of the lumbar spine?-a systematic review.

PURPOSE: The aim of this systematically review is to detect differences between fractures located at the mid-thoracic spine compared to fractures of the thoracolumbar junction (TLJ) and the lumbar spine in osteoporotic vertebral body fractures. METHODS: This review is based on articles retrieved by a systematic search in the PubMed and Web of Science database for publications regarding osteoporotic fractures of the thoracolumbar spine with respect to the fracture location. Differences in prevalence, cause of fracture, fracture healing, and outcomes between the mid-thoracic spine and the TLJ and the lumbar spine were considered. RESULTS: Altogether, 238 articles could be retrieved from the literature search. A total of 222 articles were excluded. Thus, 16 remaining original articles were included in this systematic review comprising the topics prevalence, bone mineral density and regional blood flow, biomechanics, subsequent fractures, and outcome, respectively. The overall level of evidence of the vast majority of studies was moderate to low. CONCLUSION: Several differences between osteoporotic fractures of the mid-thoracic spine compared to the TLJ and the lumbar spine could be identified. Thereby, osteoporotic mid-thoracic fractures seem to be particularly more related to frailty without a history of traumatic injury compared to osteoporotic fractures of the TLJ and the lumbar spine. Additionally, the presence of severe mid-thoracic fractures predicts subsequent fractures of the hip. In contrast, subsequent fractures of the spine are less likely.

Variations in management of A3 and A4 cervical spine fractures as designated by the AO Spine Subaxial Injury Classification System.

OBJECTIVE: Optimal management of A3 and A4 cervical spine fractures, as defined by the AO Spine Subaxial Injury Classification System, remains controversial. The objectives of this study were to determine whether significant management variations exist with respect to 1) fracture location across the upper, middle, and lower subaxial cervical spine and 2) geographic region, experience, or specialty. METHODS: A survey was internationally distributed to 272 AO Spine members across six geographic regions (North America, South America, Europe, Africa, Asia, and the Middle East). Participants' management of A3 and A4 subaxial cervical fractures across cervical regions was assessed in four clinical scenarios. Key characteristics considered in the vignettes included degree of neurological deficit, pain severity, cervical spine stability, presence of comorbidities, and fitness for surgery. Respondents were also directly asked about their preferences for operative management and misalignment acceptance across the subaxial cervical spine. RESULTS: In total, 155 (57.0%) participants completed the survey. Pooled analysis demonstrated that surgeons were more likely to offer operative intervention for both A3 (p < 0.001) and A4 (p < 0.001) fractures located at the cervicothoracic junction compared with fractures at the upper or middle subaxial cervical regions. There were no significant variations in management for junctional incomplete (p = 0.116) or complete (p = 0.342) burst fractures between geographic regions. Surgeons with more than 10 years of experience were more likely to operatively manage A3 (p < 0.001) and A4 (p < 0.001) fractures than their younger counterparts. Neurosurgeons were more likely to offer surgical stabilization of A3 (p < 0.001) and A4 (p < 0.001) fractures than their orthopedic colleagues. Clinicians from both specialties agreed regarding their preference for fixation of lower junctional A3 (p = 0.866) and A4 (p = 0.368) fractures. Overall, surgical fixation was recommended more often for A4 than A3 fractures in all four scenarios (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The subaxial cervical spine should not be considered a single unified entity. Both A3 and A4 fracture subtypes were more likely to be surgically managed at the cervicothoracic junction than the upper or middle subaxial cervical regions. The authors also determined that treatment strategies for A3 and A4 subaxial cervical spine fractures varied significantly, with the latter demonstrating a greater likelihood of operative management. These findings should be reflected in future subaxial cervical spine trauma algorithms.

Multicenter evaluation of therapeutic strategies of inpatients with osteoporotic vertebral fractures in Germany.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess therapeutic strategies of inpatients with osteoporotic thoracolumbar fractures (OTF) in Germany. METHODS: Prospective multi-center study including 16 German-speaking trauma centers over a period of 7 months. All inpatients with OTF were included. Radiological and clinical data on admission and treatment modalities were assessed. RESULTS: Seven hundred and seven (99.3%) out of 712 included patients (73.3% female) could be evaluated. Mean age was 75 years (30-103). 51.3% could not remember any traumatic incident. Fracture distribution was from T2 to L5 with L1 (19%) most commonly affected. According to the Magerl classification type A1 (52.1%) and A3 (42.7%) were most common. B and C type injuries (2.6%) and neurological deficits (3.1%) were rare. Previous progression of vertebral deformation was evident in 34.4% of patients and related to t score below - 3 (Odds ratio 1.9661). Patients presented with anticoagulation medication (15.4%), dementia (13%), and ASA score > 3 (12.4%) frequently. 82.3% of patients complained of pain > 4 on VAS, 37% could not be mobilized despite pain medication according to grade II WHO pain ladder. 81.6% received operative treatment. Kyphoplasty (63.8%) and hybrid stabilization including kyphoplasty with (14.4%) or without screw augmentation (7.6%) were the techniques most frequently used. Invasiveness of treatment increased with degree of instability. CONCLUSIONS: OTF are mostly type A compression fractures. Patients suffer from severe pain and immobilization frequently. Progression of deformity is correlated to t score below - 3. Treatment of inpatients is mainly surgical, with kyphoplasty followed by hybrid stabilization as commonly used techniques.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 3 Treatment Arms for Vertebral Compression Fractures: A Comparison of Improvement in Pain, Adjacent-Level Fractures, and Quality of Life Between Vertebroplasty, Kyphoplasty, and Nonoperative Management.

BACKGROUND: Osteoporotic vertebral fractures (OVFs) have become increasingly common, and previous nonrandomized and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have compared the effects of cement augmentation versus nonoperative management on the clinical outcome. This meta-analysis focuses on RCTs and the calculated differences between cement augmentation techniques and nonsurgical management in outcome (e.g., pain reduction, adjacent-level fractures, and quality of life [QOL]). METHODS: A systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, and the following scientific search engines were used: MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Scopus. The inclusion criteria included RCTs that addressed different treatment strategies for OVF. The primary outcome was pain, which was determined by a visual analog scale (VAS) score; the secondary outcomes were the risk of adjacent-level fractures and QOL (as determined by the EuroQol-5 Dimension [EQ-5D] questionnaire, the Oswestry Disability Index [ODI], the Quality of Life Questionnaire of the European Foundation for Osteoporosis [QUALEFFO], and the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire [RDQ]). Patients were assigned to 3 groups according to their treatment: vertebroplasty (VP), kyphoplasty (KP), and nonoperative management (NOM). The short-term (weeks), midterm (months), and long-term (>1 year) effects were compared. A random effects model was used to summarize the treatment effect, including I2 for assessing heterogeneity and the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias 2 (RoB 2) tool for assessment of ROB. Funnel plots were used to assess risk of publication bias. The log of the odds ratio (OR) between treatments is reported. RESULTS: After screening of 1,861 references, 53 underwent full-text analysis and 16 trials (30.2%) were included. Eleven trials (68.8%) compared VP and NOM, 1 (6.3%) compared KP and NOM, and 4 (25.0%) compared KP and VP. Improvement of pain was better by 1.31 points (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41 to 2.21; p < 0.001) after VP when compared with NOM in short-term follow-up. Pain effects were similar after VP and KP (midterm difference of 0.0 points; 95% CI, -0.25 to 0.25). The risk of adjacent-level fractures was not increased after any treatment (log OR, -0.16; 95% CI, -0.83 to 0.5; NOM vs. VP or KP). QOL did not differ significantly between the VP or KP and NOM groups except in the short term when measured by the RDQ. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis provides evidence in favor of the surgical treatment of OVFs. Surgery was associated with greater improvement of pain and was unrelated to the development of adjacent-level fractures or QOL. Although improvements in sagittal balance after surgery were poorly documented, surgical treatment may be warranted if pain is a relevant problem. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Traumatic Fractures of the Thoracic Spine. / Traumatische Frakturen der Brustwirbelsäule.

The majority of traumatic vertebral fractures occur at the thoracolumbar junction and the lumbar spine and less commonly at the mid-thoracic and upper thoracic spine. In accordance, a high number of articles are dealing with thoracolumbar fractures focusing on the thoracolumbar junction. Nonetheless, the biomechanics of the thoracic spine differ from the thoracolumbar junction and the lumbar vertebral spine. The aim of this review is to screen the literature dealing with acute traumatic thoracic vertebral fractures in patients with normal bone quality. Thereby, the diagnostic of thoracic vertebral body fractures should include a CT examination. Ideally, the CT should include the whole thoracic cage particularly in patients suffering high energy accidents or in those with clinical suspicion of concomitant thoracic injuries. Generally, concomitant thoracic injuries are frequently seen in patients with thoracic spine fractures. Particularly sternal fractures cause an increase in fracture instability. In case of doubt, long segment stabilization is recommended in patients with unstable mid- und upper thoracic fractures, particularly in those patients with a high grade of instability.