Percutaneous vertebral augmentation with polyethylene mesh and allograft bone for traumatic thoracolumbar fractures

Surgical treatment of traumatic fractures of the thoracic and lumbar spine: A systematic review

Introduction

The treatment of traumatic thoracic and lumbar spine fractures remains controversial. To date no consensus exists on the correct choice of surgical approach and technique.

Research question

to provide a comprehensive up-to-date overview of the available different surgical methods and their quantified outcomes.

Methods

PubMed and EMBASE were searched between 2001 and 2020 using the term 'spinal fractures'. Inclusion criteria were: adults, ≥10 cases, ≥12 months follow-up, thoracic or lumbar fractures, and surgery <3 weeks of trauma. Studies were categorized per surgical technique: Posterior open (PO), posterior percutaneous (PP), stand-alone vertebral body augmentation (SA), anterior scopic (AS), anterior open (AO), posterior percutaneous and anterior open (PPAO), posterior percutaneous and anterior scopic (PPAS), posterior open and anterior open (POAO) and posterior open and anterior scopic (POAS). The PO group was used as a reference group.

Results

After duplicate removal 6042 articles were identified. A total of 102 articles were Included, in which 137 separate surgical technique cohorts were described: PO (n = 75), PP, (n = 39), SA (n = 12), AO (n = 5), PPAO (n = 1), PPAS (n = 1), POAO (n = 2) and POAS (n = 2).

Discussion and conclusion

For type A3/A4 burst fractures, without severe neurological deficit, posterior percutaneous (PP) technique seems the safest and most feasible option in the past two decades. If needed, PP can be combined with anterior augmentation to prevent secondary kyphosis. Furthermore, posterior open (PO) technique is feasible in almost all types of fractures. Also, this technique can provide for an additional posterior decompression or fusion. Overall, no neurologic deterioration was reported following surgical intervention.

Use of the SpineJack direct reduction for treating type A2, A3 and A4 fractures of the thoracolumbar spine: a retrospective case series

BACKGROUND

Compression injuries of the thoracolumbar spine without neurological impairment are usually treated with minimally invasive procedures. Intravertebral expandable implants represent an alternative strategy in fractures with low fragments' displacement.

METHODS

Patients with A2, A3 and A4 fractures of the T10-L2 spinal segment without neurological impairment, fracture gap >2 mm, vertebra plana, pedicle rupture, pedicle diameter <6 mm, spinal canal encroachment ≥50%, and vertebral body spread >30% were treated with the SpineJack device. Patients with pathological/osteoporotic fractures were excluded. Demographic and fracture-related data were assessed together with vertebral kyphosis correction, vertebral height restoration/loss of correction and final kyphosis. The modified Rankin Scale (mRS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Smiley-Webster Pain Scale (SWPS) and EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D) were evaluated at 1 (-post), 6 and 12 months (-fup) after surgery. Statistical analysis was performed and p values ≤0.05 were considered significant.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven patients were included in the study. Patients aged >60 years reported worse kyphosis correction (<4°) with more postoperative complications, while vertebral plasticity in younger patients, fragmentation-related greater remodeling in A3/A4 fractures, and treatments within 7 days of trauma determined superior wedging corrections, with better EQ-5D-post and mRS-fup. Cement leakages did not affect functional outcome, while female gender and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score of 3-4 were associated with worse ODI-fup and VAS-fup. Although fracture characteristics and radiological outcome did not negatively influence the clinical outcome, A2 fracture was a risk factor for complications, thus indirectly compromising both the functional and radiological outcome.

CONCLUSION

With spread of <30%, the SpineJack is an alternative to minimally invasive fixations for treating A3/A4 thoracolumbar fractures, being able to preserve healthy motion segments in younger patients and provide an ultra-conservative procedure for elderly and fragile patients.

Minimally invasive surgery for thoracolumbar spinal trauma

The indications for operative intervention after thoracolumbar spine trauma have been well described. Advances in minimally invasive techniques, including percutaneous pedicle screw fixation and mini-open anterolateral retractor-based approaches can improve surgical outcomes when appropriately applied by reducing blood loss, operative duration and post-operative pain. Moreover, they allow for theoretical advantages by preservation of muscular and skeletal blood supply and innervation that is typically lost during the muscular dissection of open approaches. For thoracolumbar spine fractures, percutaneous fixation allows for internal bracing of unstable fractures during healing while maintaining sagittal alignment. In instances of neurological compromise from fracture retropulsion, corpectomies may be required, and mini-open lateral approaches adopted from degenerative disease applications allow for a minimally invasive manner to treat the defect. These further allow for placement of wide rectangular-footprint expandable vertebral body replacement devices to provide anterior column support. We believe this allows for lower rates of subsidence and helps to maintain the biomechanical integrity necessary to prevent post-traumatic malalignment and kyphosis. Together, these minimally invasive techniques combined supply the spine surgeon with a minimally invasive armamentarium to treat nearly all thoracolumbar spine trauma. Surgeons should be comfortable with the strengths and shortcomings of these approaches in order to successfully apply them for this pathology.