A Case Series That Supports the Application of the S2AI Technique for Fractures and Failures After Lumbosacral Fusion.

BACKGROUND: Sacral fractures and failures are uncommon after lumbosacral fusion but have received increasing attention in the surgical literature. They can be difficult to diagnose, making timely treatment difficult. No consensus has been reached on the characteristics of these complications or on optimal treatment. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: The goal of this retrospective case series is to contribute additional cases of these uncommon complications of lumbosacral fusion to the surgical literature to help clinicians to anticipate, diagnose, characterize, manage, and treat sacral fractures and failures after lumbosacral fusion. METHODS: The medical records of five patients who experienced a sacral fracture or failure after lumbosacral fusion between January 2012 and November 2017 were identified and reviewed retrospectively. Records were reviewed for age, sex, clinical presentation, previous management, outpatient clinical records, imaging, and post-operative course. RESULTS: Four patients in the series experienced a sacral fracture and one experienced hardware failure. All patients presented with elevated pain and underwent revision surgery. Radiographic detection of the fracture or failure occurred at a mean of 11.2 weeks (range, 3 to 24 weeks) after initial surgery, and the mean age of patients was 68.2 years (range, 63 to 80 years). Of the five patients, four were female; two had been diagnosed with osteoporosis and two with osteopenia. In our case series, the S2-alar-iliac (S2AI) technique was used with success in all five cases. CONCLUSION: Fractures and failures after lumbosacral fusion can be difficult to diagnose because of delayed presentation, nonspecific presenting symptoms, and a lack of identifiable mechanism. A high index of suspicion is required to detect these uncommon complications, and patients have responded well to both conservative and surgical treatments.

Proximal periarticular locking plates in proximal humeral fractures: functional outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Some recent studies have asserted that locking plates do not provide adequate fixation of proximal humeral fractures. The purpose of this study is to review our experience with proximal humeral locking plates, including complications, functional outcomes, and predictors of successful treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: At our institution, 45 patients (46 shoulders) with displaced proximal humeral fractures were treated with a proximal humeral locking plate over a 6-year period. Patients underwent standard surgical and rehabilitation protocols and were evaluated clinically with Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons standardized outcome measurements and range of motion at last follow-up. Radiographs obtained preoperatively, immediately postoperatively, and at final follow-up were evaluated for fracture type, union, and change in alignment. RESULTS: There were 43 patients (44 shoulders) available for range-of-motion and functional outcome measures with an average follow-up of 34 months. Fracture types included 19 two-part, 21 three-part, 3 four-part, and 1 head-splitting fracture. The mean Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score was 11. The average American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score was 85. The average visual analog pain score was 0.8. The average range of motion was as follows: elevation, 140°; external rotation at side, 49°; external rotation in abduction, 77°; and internal rotation, T11. No patient had evidence of screw cutout, varus collapse, or avascular necrosis. One patient required hardware removal. CONCLUSIONS: Displaced proximal humeral fractures can be successfully fixed with locking plates when attention is paid to anatomic reduction, proper plate placement below to the greater tuberosity to allow abduction, screws in the head with subchondral bone purchase, calcar screws from inferior-lateral to superior-medial and delaying shoulder motion until at least 2 weeks.

Change in sagittal balance with placement of an interspinous spacer.

STUDY DESIGN: A prospective case series. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of X-STOP implantation on sagittal spinal balance using 36-inch films. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Interspinous process spacers have been shown as an effective treatment of neurogenic claudication. The devices block the last few degrees of extension at the stenotic level, thus preventing compression of the nerve roots. These devices have been criticized because they may push the patient's spine into a kyphotic position. However, opening the stenotic level may allow a patient to stand more upright, thereby improving sagittal balance. METHODS: Institutional review board's approval was obtained. A prospective study of 20 patients who were undergoing an X-STOP insertion was utilized. Their spines were x-rayed preoperatively and postoperatively with 36-inch films. Preoperative and postoperative sagittal balance was measured with a C7 body plum line on both films and the difference was measured. Lumbar lordosis was also compared using Cobb angles. RESULTS: Measurements taken from lateral full-length spine radio-graphs showed an average improvement in sagittal balance of 2.0 cm (range -3.7 to 6.1 cm). The average change in lordosis was -1.1°. CONCLUSION: Although previous studies of interspinous process distraction have examined segmental lordosis, disc angles, and other parameters, this study is the first to examine overall spinal balance on full-length films. Interspinous distraction does not seem to be detrimental to sagittal balance, and may improve it.

The anatomic suitability of the C2 vertebra for intralaminar and pedicular fixation: a computed tomography study.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Several methods have been used to stabilize the atlantoaxial joint, including the use of C2 pedicle and laminar screws. No report has used computed tomography (CT) angiograms to compare the risk to the vertebral artery or assess the suitability for each fixation technique. PURPOSE: To compare the suitability of C2 pedicle versus laminar screws using CT angiograms. STUDY DESIGN: We retrospectively evaluated the anatomic dimensions of the C2 lamina and pedicle in 50 patients using CT angiograms. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the last 50 patients admitted who underwent CT angiograms of the head and neck. Data recorded included the pedicle length and width and the laminar length and width. Vertebral artery anatomy was also assessed to determine if an aberrant location would preclude pedicle fixation. RESULTS: Mean pedicle length and width were 15.5±3.5 and 4.7±1.7 mm, respectively, with 24% of patients having anatomy that would preclude 3.5-mm pedicle screw fixation. The mean lamina length and width were 25.2±3.6 and 5.5±1.4 mm, and more than 90% of patients could tolerate a 3.5-mm C2 laminar screw. CONCLUSION: Preoperative CT angiography or noncontrast CT is an excellent method to delineate the anatomy at C2 to determine the suitability for pedicle or intralaminar fixation. In cases where vertebral artery anatomy precludes C2 pedicle fixation, more than 90% of patients may be a candidate for C2 intralaminar fixation.

An S-2 alar iliac pelvic fixation. Technical note.

Multiple techniques of pelvic fixation exist. Distal fixation to the pelvis is crucial for spinal deformity surgery. Fixation techniques such as transiliac bars, iliac bolts, and iliosacral screws are commonly used, but these techniques may require separate incisions for placement, leading to potential wound complications and increased dissection. Additionally, the use of transverse connector bars is almost always necessary with these techniques, as their placement is not in line with the S-1 pedicle screw and cephalad instrumentation. The S-2 alar iliac pelvic fixation is a newer technique that has been developed to address some of these issues. It is an in-line technique that can be placed during an open procedure or percutaneously.