Risk factors for distal junctional failure in long-construct instrumentation for adult spinal deformity.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to identify risk factors associated with postoperative DJF in long constructs for ASD. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed at a tertiary referral spine centre from 01/01/2007 to 31/12/2016. Demographic, clinical and radiographic parameters were collated for patients with DJF in the postoperative period and compared to those without DJF. Survival analyses were performed using univariate logistic regression to identify variables with a p value < 0.05 for inclusion in multivariate analysis. Spearman's correlations were performed where applicable. RESULTS: One hundred two patients were identified. 41 (40.2%) suffered DJF in the postoperative period, with rod fracture being the most common sign of DJF (13/65; 20.0%). Mean time to failure was 32.4 months. On univariate analysis, pedicle subtraction osteotomy (p = 0.03), transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (p < 0.001), pre-op LL (p < 0.01), pre-op SVA (p < 0.01), pre-op SS (p = 0.02), postop LL (p = 0.03), postop SVA (p = 0.01), postop PI/LL (p < 0.001), LL correction (p < 0.001), SVA correction (p < 0.001), PT correction (p = 0.03), PI/LL correction (p < 0.001), SS correction (p = 0.03) all proved significant. On multivariate analysis, pedicle subtraction osteotomy (OR 27.3; p = 0.03), postop SVA (p < 0.01) and LL correction (p = 0.02) remained statistically significant as independent risk factors for DJF. CONCLUSION: Recently, DJF has received recognition as its own entity due to a notable postoperative incidence. Few studies to date have evaluated risk factors for DJF. The results of our study highlight that pedicle subtraction osteotomy, poor correction of lumbar lordosis, and sagittal vertical axis are significantly associated with postoperative occurrence of DJF.

Surgical strategy of lumbopelvic instrumentation in the treatment of lumbosacral tuberculosis: S2-alar-iliac screws vs iliac screws.

The objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and clinical outcomes of S2-alar-iliac (S2AI) and iliac screw (IS) techniques in the lumbopelvic reconstruction of lumbosacral tuberculosis patients. From January 2014 to August 2016, 26 patients with lumbosacral tuberculosis attending the 8th Medical Centre of Chinese PLA General Hospital were included in this retrospective study. The subjects were divided into two groups based on the lumbopelvic fixation type (16 patients in the S2AI group, 10 patients in the IS group). The operation time, blood loss, length of hospitalisation, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), C-reactive protein (CRP) level, visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), ambulatory status, and 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) scores of the patients in two groups were recorded and compared. In addition, surgical complications were collected and analysed. The operation time and intraoperative blood loss were significantly lower in the S2AI group than that in the IS group (P < .05). Compared with preoperative data, postoperative data showed significant improvement in ESR, CRP level, ODI scores, VAS scores, ambulatory status, and SF-36 (P < .05), but there was no significant difference in remission degree between the two groups. Compared with IS group, The S2AI group had significantly lower rates of symptomatic screw prominence (P < .05). Both the IS and S2AI fixation techniques can achieve satisfactory outcomes for the restoration of lumbosacral stability of lumbosacral tuberculosis. Furthermore, compared to the traditional IS fixation technique, the S2AI fixation technique can shorten operation time and reduce surgical trauma for the treatment of lumbosacral tuberculosis.

Innovative sacropelvic fixation using iliac screws and triangular titanium implants.

PURPOSE: Sacropelvic fixation is frequently used in combination with thoracolumbar instrumentation for the correction of severe spinal deformities. The purpose of this study was to explore the effects of the triangular titanium implants on the iliac screw fixation. Our hypothesis was that the use of triangular titanium implants can increase the stability of the iliac screw fixation. METHODS: Three T10-pelvis instrumented models were created: pedicle screws and rods in T10-S1, and bilateral iliac screws (IL); posterior fixation and bilateral iliac screws and triangular implants inserted bilaterally in a sacro-alar-iliac trajectory (IL-Tri-SAI); posterior fixation and bilateral iliac screws and two bilateral triangular titanium implants inserted in a lateral trajectory (IL-Tri-Lat). Outputs of these models, such as hardware stresses, were compared against a model with pedicle screws and rods in T10-S1 (PED). RESULTS: Sacropelvic fixation decreased the L5-S1 motion by 75-90%. The motion of the SIJ was reduced by 55-80% after iliac fixation; the addition of triangular titanium implants further reduced it. IL, IL-Tri-SAI and IL-Tri-Lat demonstrated lower S1 pedicle stresses with respect to PED. Triangular implants had a protective effect on the iliac screw stresses. CONCLUSION: Sacropelvic fixation decreased L5-S1 range of motion suggesting increased stability of the joint. The combination of triangular titanium implants and iliac screws reduced the residual flexibility of the sacroiliac joint, and resulted in a protective effect on the S1 pedicle screws and iliac screws themselves. Clinical studies may be performed to demonstrate applicability of these FEA results to patient outcomes.

Can pelvic incidence change after spinal deformity correction to the pelvis with S2-alar-iliac screws?

PURPOSE: Pelvic incidence (PI) is assumed to be fixed, yet studies have reported PI changes after long fusions to the pelvis. In a cohort of ASD patients undergoing surgery with S2-alar-iliac (S2AI) screws, we sought to: (1) report the magnitude of PI changes, and (2) evaluate subsequent pelvic parameter changes. METHODS: A retrospective case series of ASD patients undergoing surgical correction with S2AI screw placement and sagittal cantilever correction maneuvers was conducted. Patients were categorized based on preoperative PI: High-PI (H-PI) (PI ≥ 60°); Normal-PI (N-PI) (60° > PI > 40°); Low-PI (L-PI) (PI ≤ 40°). PI was measured preoperatively and immediately postoperatively. A significant PI change was established a priori at ≥ 6.0. PI, pelvic tilt (PT), lumbar lordosis (LL), and PI-LL mismatch were analyzed. RESULTS: In 68 patients (82.3% female, ages 22-75 years), the average change in PI was 4.6° ± 3.1, and 25 (36.8%) had a PI change ≥ 6.0° with breakdown as follows: H-PI 12 (66.7%) patients, 9 (25.87%) patients, and 4 (33.3%) patients. Of 25 patients with PI changes, 10 (14.7%) had a PI increase and 15 (22.1%) had a PI decrease. Significant improvements were seen in PT, LL, PI-LL mismatch in all patients with a PI change ≥ 6.0°, in addition to both subgroups with an increase or decrease in PI. CONCLUSIONS: PI changes of ≥ 6.0° occurred in 36.8% of patients, and H-PI patients most commonly experienced PI changes. Despite PI alterations, pelvic parameters significantly improved postoperatively. These results may be explained by sacroiliac joint laxity, S2AI screw placement, or aggressive sagittal cantilever techniques.

Biomechanics of sacropelvic fixation: a comprehensive finite element comparison of three techniques.

PURPOSE: Sacropelvic fixation is frequently used in combination with thoracolumbar instrumentation for complex deformity correction and is commonly associated with pseudoarthrosis, implant failure and loosening. This study compared pedicle screw fixation (PED) with three different sacropelvic fixation techniques, namely iliac screws (IL), S2 alar-iliac screws (S2AI) and laterally placed triangular titanium implants (SI), all in combination with lumbosacral instrumentation, accounting for implant micromotion. METHODS: Existing finite element models of pelvis-L5 of three patients including lumbopelvic instrumentation were utilized. Moments of 7.5 Nm in the three directions combined with a 500 N compressive load were simulated. Measured metrics included flexibility, instrumentation stresses and bone-implant interface loads. RESULTS: Fixation effectively reduced the sacroiliac flexibility. Compared to PED, IL and S2AI induced a reduction in peak stresses in the S1 pedicle screws. Rod stresses were mostly unaffected by S2AI and SI, but IL demonstrated a stress increase. In comparison with a previous work depicting full osteointegration, SI was found to have similar instrumentation stresses as those due to PED. CONCLUSIONS: Fixation with triangular implants did not result in stress increase on the lumbosacral instrumentation, likely due to the lack of connection with the posterior rods. IL and S2AI had a mild protective effect on S1 pedicle screws in terms of stresses and bone-implant loads. IL resulted in an increase in the rod stresses. A comparison between this study and previous work incorporating full osteointegration demonstrates how these results may be applied clinically to better understand the effects of different treatments on patient outcomes. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Evaluation of iliac screw, S2 alar-iliac screw and laterally placed triangular titanium implants for sacropelvic fixation in combination with posterior lumbar instrumentation: a finite element study.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to implement laterally placed triangular titanium implants as a technique of sacropelvic fixation in long posterior lumbar instrumentation and to characterize the effects of iliac screws, S2 alar-iliac screws and of triangular implants on rod and S1 pedicle screw stresses. METHODS: Four female models of the lumbopelvic spine were created. For each of them, five finite element models replicating the following configurations were generated: intact, posterior fixation with pedicle screws to S1 (PED), with PED and iliac screws (IL), with PED and S2 alar-iliac (S2AI) screws, and with PED and bilateral triangular titanium implants (SI). Simulations were conducted in compression, flexion-extension, lateral bending and axial rotation. Rod stresses in the L5-S1 segment as well as in the S1 pedicle screws were compared. RESULTS: One anatomical model was not simulated due to dysmorphia of the sacroiliac joints. PED resulted in the highest implant stresses. Values up to 337 MPa in lateral bending were noted, which were more than double than the other configurations. When compared with IL, S2AI and SI resulted in lower stresses in both screws and rods (on average 33% and 41% for S2AI and 17% and 50% for SI). CONCLUSIONS: Implant stresses after S2AI and SI fixations were lower than those attributable to IL. Therefore, pedicle screws and rods may have a lower risk of mechanical failure when coupled with sacropelvic fixation via S2AI or triangular titanium implants, although the risk of clinical loosening remains an area of further investigation. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Dual iliac screws in spinopelvic fixation: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: The classical spinopelvic fixation includes 1 iliac screw on each side. The purpose of this study is to specify the indications of the "dual iliac screw" (DIS) construct, i.e., when to put 2 iliac screws on each side, to describe its biomechanical advantages, and to define its related technical aspects. METHODS: A primary search on Medline through PubMed distribution was performed, with the use of the terms "pelvic fixation" or "spinopelvic" or "lumbo-iliac" and the terms "dual iliac screw" or "double iliac screw." English papers corresponding to the inclusion criteria were analyzed regarding the specific indications of the DIS construct and its surgical technique and advantages. RESULTS: Eleven papers were identified according to the research criteria and included in this review. Three main indications were identified for the DIS technique according to three types of pathologies: in adult deformities when a long construct is needed in an osteoporotic patient or when correction requires three-column osteotomy of the sacrum; in trauma when a U-shaped fracture-dislocation of the sacrum is involved; in sacral tumors when a sacrectomy is performed or when destructive metastatic lesions of the sacrum require palliative surgical treatment. Biomechanically, the DIS technique proved to have higher construct stiffness in terms of compression and torsion. CONCLUSION: In specific cases, affecting different areas of spinal diseases, the DIS technique is more advantageous, when compared to the "single iliac screw" version, as it would provide a stronger and safer fixation at the base of the spinopelvic construct. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Obturator inlet and iliac oblique technique for safe, convenient, and reliable iliac screw placement.

Background: There are many described techniques for the placement of posterior iliac screws for extension of lumbar posterior spinal instrumentation to the pelvis. However, each one has its limitations. We describe our technique for fluoroscopic guidance of iliac screw placement utilizing the obturator inlet and iliac oblique views as well as a detailed review of how to obtain and interpret these views for safe iliac screw placement. Methods: Retrospective chart review of patients undergoing iliac screw placement utilizing the obturator inlet and iliac oblique views as part of spine instrumentation between January 2019 and March 2022. Screw length and bony breaches are reported utilizing this technique. Results: Twelve patients underwent posterior lumbopelvic fixation with a total of 23 screws placed via either open or percutaneous technique. The mean screw length was 96.5 mm (Range 80-110, standard dev 7.75). There were no recorded breaches or recannulation attempts. Conclusions: We show how this technique is a much more convenient alternative to the placement of iliac screws under the obturator outlet oblique ("teardrop" view) which necessitates that the C-arm is in line with the instruments being placed. These described views can be used to place screws with either open or percutaneous techniques and with either the posterior superior iliac spine (PSIS) or S2 alar iliac (S2AI) starting points.

Pelvic Fixation Construct Trends in Spinal Deformity Surgery.

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.

Effect of Sacropelvic Hardware on Axis and Center of Rotation of the Sacroiliac Joint: A Finite Element Study.

BACKGROUND: The sacroiliac joint (SIJ) transfers the load of the upper body to the lower extremities while allowing a variable physiological movement among individuals. The axis of rotation (AoR) and center of rotation (CoR) of the SIJ can be evaluated to analyze the stability of the SIJ, including when the sacrum is fixed. The purpose of this study was to determine how load intensity affects the SIJ for the intact model and to characterize how sacropelvic fixation performed with different techniques affects this joint. METHODS: Five T10-pelvis models were used: (1) intact model; (2) pedicle screws and rods in T10-S1; (3)pedicle screws and rods in T10-S1, and bilateral S2 alar-iliac screws (S2AI); (4) pedicle screws and rods in T10-S1, bilateral S2AI screws, and triangular implants inserted bilaterally in a sacral alar-iliac trajectory ; and (5) pedicle screws and rods in T10-S1, bilateral S2AI screws, and 2 bilateral triangular implants inserted in a lateral trajectory. Outputs of these models under flexion-extension were compared: AoR and CoR of the SIJ at incremental steps from 0 to 7.5 Nm for the intact model and AoR and CoR of the SIJ for the instrumented models at 7.5 Nm. RESULTS: The intact model was validated against an in vivo study by comparing range of motion and displacement of the sacrum. Increasing the load intensity for the intact model led to an increase of the rotation of the sacrum but did not change the CoR. Comparison among the instrumented models showed that sacropelvic fixation techniques reduced the rotation of the sacrum and stabilized the SIJ, in particular with triangular implants. CONCLUSION: The study outcomes suggest that increasing load intensity increases the rotation of the sacrum but does not influence the CoR, and use of sacropelvic fixation increases the stability of the SIJ, especially when triangular implants are employed. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The choice of the instrumentation strategy for sacropelvic fixation affects the stability of the construct in terms of both range of motion and axes of rotation, with direct consequences on the risk of failure and mobilization. Clinical studies should be performed to confirm these biomechanical findings.

Kappa: Preliminary Results on a Novel Technique for Pelvic Fixation in Adult Spinal Deformity Correction.

Study Design: Retrospective cohort study. Objectives: Pelvic fixation in degenerative spinal deformation is as crucial as demanding. Several pelvic anchoring technics have been described, but loosening rates remain high for most solutions. Here is described the "Kappa" technic, combining ilio-sacral screws to S2A1 screws at 2 years of follow-up. Methods: Thirteen patients that underwent a spinal deformity correction with "Kappa" fixation to the pelvis and with more than 2 years of follow-up were prospectively included in this study. The surgical technic is described, and clinical and radiographic data have been collected for all patients. Results: The population exhibited an important pre-operative sagittal imbalance (mean SVA of 104,4 mm, mean PI-LL mismatch of 22,8°) that had improved significatively after surgery (mean SVA of 75,5 mm and mean PI-LL mismatch of 4,9°). No loosening of pull-out of the implants was to deplore at 2 years of follow-up. Conclusions: The association of ilio-sacral screw, resistant to pull-out because of the traction axis perpendicular to the construct, to S2A1 screws, known to be effective in sagittal balance restoration seems to be an effective and safe option to pelvic fixation for adult spinal deformity correction. Level of Evidence: IV.

Lumbopelvic fixation with S2 alar-iliac screws for U-shaped sacral fractures.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the surgical methods and clinical effects of lumbopelvic fixation (LPF) with S2 alar-iliac (S2AI) screws for U-shaped sacral fractures. METHODS: From December 2019 to August 2020, 14 patients with U-shaped sacral fractures were treated with LPF using S2AI screws. Demographics, fracture classification, mechanism of injury, surgical treatment, complications and clinical results were assessed. All patients had a LPF with or without nerve decompression. The reduction quality was evaluated according to the Matta criteria. Neurological function was evaluated according to the Gibbons grading. The activities of daily life were evaluated according to the Majeed scoring system at the last follow-up. RESULTS: Among 14 consecutive patients with U-shaped sacral fractures, the age at injury ranged from 13 to 72 years (average 30.3 ± 17.5 years). There were 4 males and 10 females. All patients were followed up for 6-15 months (average 7.8 ± 2.7 months). Thirteen patients were fixed with bilateral S2AI screws, and one patient was fixed only unilaterally due to unilateral spinopelvic dissociation. The excellent and good rate of postoperative pelvic reduction quality was 92% (excellent 10, good 3, fair 1). At the latest follow-up, the excellent and good rate of pelvic function was 100% (excellent 9, good 5) and all patients achieved different extents of neurological recovery. One patient had a postoperative superficial surgical site infection, which healed after debridement. Radiological examination at 3-6 months after operation showed that all fractures had healed. No complications were found in any patients during follow-up, such as implant fracture, loss of reduction, deep wound infection, wound dehiscence and screw protrusion discomfort. CONCLUSION: LPF with S2AI screws for the treatment of U-shaped sacral fractures has exhibited distinct advantages, including firm fixation, a low rate of surgical site complications and satisfactory clinical efficacy. This approach provides sufficient stability to accelerate the commencement of postoperative rehabilitation.

How Does Spino-Pelvic Fixation Affect Post-Operative Compensatory Mechanisms in Adult Spinal Deformity?

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective single-center multi-surgeon cohort study. OBJECTIVES: Compare the post-operative changes in the compensatory mechanisms of the sagittal balance according to the type of pelvic fixation: S2-Alar-iliac screws (S2AI) vs iliac screws (IS) in patients with Adult spine deformity (ASD). METHODS: ASD patients who underwent spino-pelvic fixation and remained with a PI-LL >10° mismatch post-operatively were included. Pre-operative and 1-year-follow-up PI, Lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic tilt (PT), sacral slope (SS), thoracic kyphosis (TK), femur obliquity angle (FOA), knee flexion angle (KFA) and ankle flexion angle (AFA) were analyzed on EOS imaging. Patients were categorized based on their pelvic fixation type (S2AI vs IS), and the pre-operative to 1-year-post-operative changes (ΔX°) in the compensatory mechanisms were compared between groups. RESULTS: Patients with S2AI (n = 53) and those with IS (n = 26) screws were comparable at baseline. ΔSS averaged 9.87° in the S2AI compared to 13.2° in the IS (P = .001), whereas the ΔKFA reached 6.01° in the S2AI as opposed to 3.06° in the IS (P = .02). The ΔPT was comparable between both groups (6.35°[S2AI group] vs 5.21°[ISgroup], P = .42). ΔTK, ΔLL, ΔFOA and ΔAFA were comparable between both groups. CONCLUSION: The type of pelvic fixation impacts significantly the post-operative compensatory mechanisms in patients with ASD. Patients with S2AI screws are more likely to compensate their remaining post-operative PI-LL mismatch through their knees and less likely through their pelvis compared to patients with IS, despite similar changes in PT. This could be explained by an increased SI joint laxity in ASD patient and the lower resistance of the iliac connectors to the junctional mechanical stresses, allowing for sacro-iliac joint motion in patients with IS.

Incidence, mechanism, and protective strategies for 2-year pelvic fixation failure after adult spinal deformity surgery with a minimum six-level fusion.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence, mechanism, and potential protective strategies for pelvic fixation failure (PFF) within 2 years after adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery. METHODS: Data for ASD patients (age ≥ 18 years, minimum of six instrumented levels) with pelvic fixation (S2-alar-iliac [S2AI] and/or iliac screws) with a minimum 2-year follow-up were consecutively collected (2015-2019). Patients with prior pelvic fixation were excluded. PFF was defined as any revision to pelvic screws, which may include broken rods across the lumbosacral junction requiring revision to pelvic screws, pseudarthrosis across the lumbosacral junction requiring revision to pelvic screws, a broken or loose pelvic screw, or sacral/iliac fracture. Patient information including demographic data and health history (age, sex, BMI, smoking status, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, osteoporosis), operative (total instrumented levels [TIL], three-column osteotomy [3CO], interbody fusion), screw (iliac, S2AI, length, diameter), rod (diameter, kickstand), rod pattern (number crossing lumbopelvic junction, lowest instrumented vertebra [LIV] of accessory rod[s], lateral connectors, dual-headed screws), and pre- and postradiographic (lumbar lordosis, pelvic incidence, pelvic tilt, major Cobb angle, lumbosacral fractional curve, C7 coronal vertical axis [CVA], T1 pelvic angle, C7 sagittal vertical axis) parameters was collected. All rods across the lumbosacral junction were cobalt-chrome. All iliac and S2AI screws were closed-headed tulips. Both univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine risk factors for PFF. RESULTS: Of 253 patients (mean age 58.9 years, mean TIL 13.6, 3CO 15.8%, L5-S1 interbody 74.7%, mean pelvic screw diameter/length 8.6/87 mm), the 2-year failure rate was 4.3% (n = 11). The mechanisms of failure included broken rods across the lumbosacral junction (n = 4), pseudarthrosis across the lumbosacral junction requiring revision to pelvic screws (n = 3), broken pelvic screw (n = 1), loose pelvic screw (n = 1), sacral/iliac fracture (n = 1), and painful/prominent pelvic screw (n = 1). A higher number of rods crossing the lumbopelvic junction (mean 3.8 no failure vs 2.9 failure, p = 0.009) and accessory rod LIV to S2/ilium (no failure 54.2% vs failure 18.2%, p = 0.003) were protective for failure. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that accessory rod LIV to S2/ilium versus S1 (OR 0.2, p = 0.004) and number of rods crossing the lumbar to pelvis (OR 0.15, p = 0.002) were protective, while worse postoperative CVA (OR 1.5, p = 0.028) was an independent risk factor for failure. CONCLUSIONS: The 2-year PFF rate was low relative to what is reported in the literature, despite patients undergoing long fusion constructs for ASD. The number of rods crossing the lumbopelvic junction and accessory rod LIV to S2/ilium relative to S1 alone likely increase construct stiffness. Residual postoperative coronal malalignment should be avoided to reduce PFF.

Stability and Instrumentation Stresses Among Sacropelvic Fixation Techniques With Novel Porous Fusion/Fixation Implants: A Finite Element Study.

BACKGROUND: Sacropelvic fixation is frequently combined with thoracolumbar instrumentation for correcting spinal deformities. This study aimed to characterize sacropelvic fixation techniques using novel porous fusion/fixation implants (PFFI). METHODS: Three T10-pelvis finite element models were created: (1) pedicle screws and rods in T10-S1, PFFI bilaterally in S2 alar-iliac (S2AI) trajectory; (2) fixation in T10-S1, PFFI bilaterally in S2AI trajectory, triangular implants bilaterally above the PFFI in a sacro-alar-iliac trajectory (PFFI-IFSAI); and (3) fixation in T10-S1, PFFI bilaterally in S2AI trajectory, PFFI in sacro-alar-iliac trajectory stacked cephalad to those in S2AI position (2-PFFI). Models were loaded with pure moments of 7.5 Nm in flexion-extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation. Outputs were compared against 2 baseline models: (1) pedicle screws and rods in T10-S1 (PED), and (2) pedicle screws and rods in T10-S1, and S2AI screws. RESULTS: PFFI and S2AI resulted in similar L5-S1 motion; adding another PFFI per side (2-PFFI) further reduced this motion. Sacroiliac joint (SIJ) motion was also similar between PFFI and S2AI; PFFI-IFSAI and 2-PFFI demonstrated a further reduction in SIJ motion. Additionally, PFFI reduced max stresses on S1 pedicle screws and on implants in the S2AI position. CONCLUSION: The study shows that supplementing a long construct with PFFI increases the stability of the L5-S1 and SIJ and reduces stresses on the S1 pedicle screws and implants in the S2AI position. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The findings suggest a reduced risk of pseudarthrosis at L5-S1 and screw breakage. Clinical studies may be performed to demonstrate applicability to patient outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Not applicable (basic science study).

How common is acute pelvic fixation failure after adult spine surgery? A single-center study of 358 patients.

OBJECTIVE: There is a paucity of literature on pelvic fixation failure after adult spine surgery in the early postoperative period. The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence of acute pelvic fixation failure in a large single-center study and to describe the lessons learned. METHODS: The authors performed a retrospective review of adult (≥ 18 years old) patients who underwent spinal fusion with pelvic fixation (iliac, S2-alar-iliac [S2AI] screws) at a single academic medical center between 2015 and 2020. All patients had a minimum of 3 instrumented levels. The minimum follow-up was 6 months after the index spine surgery. Patients with prior pelvic fixation were excluded. Acute pelvic fixation failure was defined as revision of the pelvic screws within 6 months of the primary surgery. Patient demographics and operative, radiographic, and rod/screw parameters were collected. All rods were cobalt-chrome. All iliac and S2AI screws were closed-headed screws. RESULTS: In 358 patients, the mean age was 59.5 ± 13.6 years, and 64.0% (n = 229) were female. The mean number of instrumented levels was 11.5 ± 5.5, and 79.1% (n = 283) had ≥ 6 levels fused. Three-column osteotomies were performed in 14.2% (n = 51) of patients, and 74.6% (n = 267) had an L5-S1 interbody fusion. The mean diameter/length of pelvic screws was 8.5/86.6 mm. The mean number of pelvic screws was 2.2 ± 0.5, the mean rod diameter was 6.0 ± 0 mm, and 78.5% (n = 281) had > 2 rods crossing the lumbopelvic junction. Accessory rods extended to S1 (32.7%, n = 117) or S2/ilium (45.8%, n = 164). Acute pelvic fixation failure occurred in 1 patient (0.3%); this individual had a broken S2AI screw near the head-neck junction. This 76-year-old woman with degenerative lumbar scoliosis and chronic lumbosacral zone 1 fracture nonunion had undergone posterior instrumented fusion from T10 to pelvis with bilateral S2AI screws (8.5 × 90 mm); i.e., transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion L4-S1. The patient had persistent left buttock pain postoperatively, with radiographically confirmed breakage of the left S2AI screw 68 days after surgery. Revision included instrumentation removal at L2-pelvis and a total of 4 pelvic screws. CONCLUSIONS: The acute pelvic fixation failure rate was exceedingly low in adult spine surgery. This rate may be the result of multiple factors including the preference for multirod (> 2), closed-headed pelvic screw constructs in which large-diameter long screws are used. Increasing the number of rods and screws at the lumbopelvic junction may be important factors to consider, especially for patients with high risk for nonunion.

S2-Alar-Iliac Screw Fixation versus Iliac Screw Fixation in the Treatment of Sacral Fractures.

PURPOSE: To compare the short-term therapeutic effects of S2-alar-iliac (S2AI) screw fixation and iliac screw fixation techniques in managing sacral fractures. METHODS: From September 2015 to May 2020, 42 patients with sacral fractures who underwent lumbopelvic fixation by a single surgeon were analyzed. The patients were divided into the S2AI screw group (19 patients) and the iliac screw group (23 patients). Operative data, reduction quality, postoperative complications, and functional outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: The incidence of unplanned reoperation was significantly different between patients treated with S2AI screws than in those treated with iliac screws (0 versus 6, p = 0.02). The mean intraoperative estimated blood loss was 405.26 ± 229.67 mL in the S2AI screw group and 539.13 ± 246.32 mL in the iliac screw group (P = 0.08). No significant difference was observed in either group regarding the quality of reduction, functional outcome, or low back pain. The reduction quality based on the Matta criteria and excellent/good outcomes were 21/2 in the iliac screw group and 17/2 in the S2AI screw group. The functional outcomes based on the Majeed score and excellent/good/fair outcomes were 17/3/3 in the iliac screw group and 17/1/1 in the S2AI screw group. No complications, including implant breakage, loosening of the implant, or loss of reduction were found in either group during follow-up. CONCLUSION: Both S2AI screws and iliac screws were effective in the treatment of sacral fractures. The use of S2AI screws, however, was independently associated with fewer unplanned reoperations for surgical site infection, wound dehiscence, and symptoms of screw protrusion than the use of iliac screws.

S2 alar-iliac screw versus traditional iliac screw for spinopelvic fixation: a systematic review of comparative biomechanical studies.

PURPOSE: To review and compare biomechanical properties between S2 alar-iliac (S2AI) screws and traditional iliac screws for spinopelvic fixation. METHODS: A systematic review was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. All clinical, cadaveric, and finite-element model (FEM) studies that compared the biomechanical properties between S2AI screws and traditional iliac screws were included. Study methodological quality for cadaveric studies were analyzed using the Quality Appraisal for Cadaveric Studies (QUACS) scale. RESULTS: Eight studies (4 cadaveric, 4 FEM) analyzing 58 S2AI screws and 48 traditional iliac screws were included. According to QUACS, the overall methodological quality was "moderate to good" for all four cadaveric studies. All four cadaveric studies found no difference in biomechanical stiffness, screw toggle, rod strain, and/or load-to-failure between the S2AI screws and traditional iliac screws for spinopelvic fixation. All four FEM studies found that S2AI screws were associated with lower implant stresses compared to traditional iliac screws. CONCLUSIONS: There is moderate biomechanical evidence to suggest that there is no significant difference in stability and stiffness between S2AI screws and traditional iliac screws for spinopelvic fixation. However, there is some evidence to support that the placement of S2AI screws may have lower implant stresses on the overall lumbosacral instrumentation compared to traditional iliac screws.

Ball Tip Technique for S2AI Screw Placement in Sacropelvic Fixation: A Comparative Study with Conventional Freehand Technique.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficiency of the ball tip technique for S2AI screw placement and introduce this technique. METHODS: Sixty-three patients who underwent pelvic fixation with S2AI screws were retrospectively reviewed. They were 29 males and 34 females with an average age of 59.6 ± 12.5 years. Among these patients, 35 patients (14 males and 21 females with an average age of 58.8 ± 11.3 years) received ball tip technique and 28 patients (15 males and 13 females with an average age of 63.7 ± 12.6 years) received conventional freehand technique. Ball tip technique was used in ball tip technique group. After a pedicle probe just penetrated the sacroiliac joint, a ball-tipped probe consisting of a ball shaped metal tip with a flexible shaft was malleted to make a guide track within ilium. This ball-tipped probe could bend automatically away from the cortex and forward through the cancellous bone when the tip met the cortical lamina of ilium, which can avoid penetration. After repeating the procedures, a guide hole was gradually formed. S2AI screw was inserted along the guide hole after tapping. In the conventional freehand group, S2AI screw was placed according to the conventional method. Postoperative computed tomography (CT) was used to assess the accuracy of screws. The time cost of screw insertion and screw-related complications were recorded. Independent t-test was used to compare the time cost between ball tip group and conventional freehand group. A chi-square test was used to compare the accuracies of the ball tip group with the conventional group. RESULTS: There were 35 patients (70 S2AI screws) in ball tip group and 28 patients (56 S2AI screws) in conventional freehand group. No screw-related complication occurred in all patients. Time costs were 9.8 ± 4.5 mins in ball tip group and 20.2.0 + 8.6 mins in conventional freehand group, respectively (P < 0.05). Four screws penetrated iliac cortex in the ball tip group vs 10 screws in conventional freehand group (5.7% vs 17.9%) (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The ball tip technique enhances the accuracy of screw placement and has less time cost compared with conventional freehand technique.

Early postoperative sacral fracture after short-segment posterior lumbar interbody fusion for L5/S1 isthmic spondylolisthesis: A case report.

Background: Early postoperative sacral fractures are extremely rare complications of single-level posterior lumbar interbody fusions (PLIFs). Case Description: A 71-year-old female presented with lower back pain and right S1 radiculopathy attributed to MR-documented L5/S1 isthmic spondylolisthesis. Following a L5 laminectomy and bilateral L5/S1 PLIF, she experienced sacral pain while sitting. When the MR showed a sacral insufficiency fracture with anterolisthesis at L5/S1, a secondary posterior fusion was extended to the pelvis, utilizing bilateral iliac screws. Following this reoperation, the patient did well and went on to achieve arthrodesis. Conclusion: Early postoperative sacral fractures that occur following single-segment L5/S1 PLIF for isthmic spondylolisthesis warrant fusion to the pelvis with bilateral iliac screws.