A new minimally invasive U-shaped lumbopelvic stabilization technique

Recent Progress in the Classification and Operation of Sacral Fractures

Most sacral fractures are caused by high-energy, violent injuries, often accompanied by lumbosacral plexus injuries, which can cause instability of the posterior pelvic ring or lumbosacral junction in severe cases. Currently, the most commonly used clinical classification methods are Denis classification, Tile classification, Isler classification, and Denis II classification. In recent years, lumbosacral vertebral injury classification and injury degree scoring systems have often been applied clinically as the choice of treatment methods. At present, the internal fixation and implantation methods of sacral fracture are developing in the direction of positive, efficient, safe, and minimally invasive. But different fixation methods have their own indications, which should be strictly followed. This article reviews the classification of sacral fractures and the latest progress in surgical treatment.

Minimally invasive transiliac anatomical locking plate for posterior pelvic ring injury: A technical trick of the gull wing plate

Posterior pelvic ring injuries commonly involve sacral fractures, which are difficult to reduce and stabilize. Because conservative treatment requires long-term bedrest and leads to unsatisfactory outcomes, surgical intervention is a beneficial option to protect neurological structures and provide sufficient stability for early mobilization. Several studies have investigated a variety of internal fixation techniques, such as iliosacral screws, transiliac bars, spinal instruments, and transiliac plates. The gull wing plate (GWP) is a pre-contoured anatomical locking plate with two cancellous screws (φ6.5 mm) and four locking screws (φ5.0 mm), the design of which is unique among posterior tension-band plates. The GWP provides reliable stability of the posterior construct of the pelvic ring and accelerates rehabilitation. Compared to alternative surgical techniques for posterior fixation, the simple surgical procedure of the GWP is minimally invasive and highly reproducible, which leads to fewer complications and less radiation exposure.

Biomechanical Effects of a Cross Connector in Sacral Fractures - A Finite Element Analysis

Background: Spinopelvic fractures and approaches of operative stabilization have been a source of controversial discussion. Biomechanical data support the benefit of a spinopelvic stabilization and minimally invasive procedures help to reduce the dissatisfying complication rate. The role of a cross connector within spinopelvic devices remains inconclusive. We aimed to analyze the effect of a cross connector in a finite element model (FE model). Study Design: A FE model of the L1-L5 spine segment with pelvis and a spinopelvic stabilization was reconstructed from patient-specific CT images. The biomechanical relevance of a cross connector in a Denis zone I (AO: 61-B2) sacrum fracture was assessed in the FE model by applying bending and twisting forces with and without a cross connector. Biomechanical outcomes from the numerical model were investigated also considering uncertainties in material properties and levels of osseointegration. Results: The designed FE model showed comparable values in range-of-motion (ROM) and stresses with reference to the literature. The superiority of the spinopelvic stabilization (L5/Os ilium) ± cross connector compared to a non-operative procedure was confirmed in all analyzed loading conditions by reduced ROM and principal stresses in the disk L5/S1, vertebral body L5 and the fracture area. By considering the combination of all loading cases, the presence of a cross connector reduced the maximum stresses in the fracture area of around 10%. This difference has been statistically validated (p < 0.0001). Conclusion: The implementation of a spinopelvic stabilization (L5/Os ilium) in sacrum fractures sustained the fracture and led to enhanced biomechanical properties compared to a non-reductive procedure. While the additional cross connector did not alter the resulting ROM in L4/L5 or L5/sacrum, the reduction of the maximum stresses in the fracture area was significant.

[Minimally invasive stabilization of sacral fractures]

BACKGROUND

Sacral fractures can be of traumatic origin and can also occur as insufficiency fractures. While the therapeutic target of mechanically stable insufficiency fractures is mainly pain relief, mechanically unstable insufficiency fractures and traumatic sacral fractures following high-energy trauma require biomechanical stabilization. Various surgical strategies are available for this, whereby minimally invasive techniques are now preferred whenever possible.

OBJECTIVE

This article presents the clinical challenges and options for minimally invasive treatment of sacral fractures.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Selected important study data are discussed and our own treatment approach is presented.

RESULTS

The most important minimally invasive techniques for operative treatment of sacral fractures are presented: sacroiliac screw osteosynthesis, lumbopelvic stabilization and sacroplasty. The selection of the surgical technique should be made on an individual basis. While sacroiliac screw osteosynthesis is the international gold standard, diverse authors have also published minimally invasive techniques for lumbopelvic stabilization. The latter enables a higher mechanical stability. In contrast, sacroplasty should only be used as an alternative treatment in insufficiency fractures. Comparative studies of the described techniques are still missing.

CONCLUSION

All surgical options have their indications. Nevertheless, the biomechanical stability which can be achieved differs widely. Therefore, an exact analysis should be carried out of what is necessary with respect to reduction and retention and what should be achieved when treating sacral fractures.