Effect of the intermediate pedicle screws and their insertion depth on sagittal balance and functional outcomes of lumbar fracture

Percutaneous monoplanar screws versus hybrid fixed axial and polyaxial screws in intermediate screw fixation for traumatic thoracolumbar burst fractures: a case-control study

BACKGROUND

To compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of monoplanar screws (MSs) versus hybrid fixed axial and polyaxial screws (HSs) in percutaneous short-segment intermediate screw fixation (PSISF) for traumatic thoracolumbar burst fractures (TTBFs) in patients without neurologic impairment.

METHODS

A consecutive series of 100 patients with single-segment TTBFs and no neurologic impairment who underwent PSISF with 6 monoplanar screws (MS group) or correct were retrospectively enrolled. The demographic data, radiologic evaluation indicators, perioperative indicators and clinical assessment indicators were analysed between the MS group and HS group.

RESULTS

The demographic data and perioperative indicators were not significantly different in the two groups (P > 0.05). The postoperative anterior vertebral height ratio (AVHR), kyphosis Cobb angle (KCA), vertebral wedge angle (VWA) and spinal canal encroachment rate (SCER) were significantly improved in both groups (*P < 0.05). The MS group obtained better correction than the HS group in terms of improvement in the AVHR, KCA and VWA after surgery (*P < 0.05). At the last follow-up, the MS group had less correction loss of AVHR, KCA and VWA (*P < 0.05). The MS group presented greater improvement in the SCER at the last follow-up (*P < 0.05). The visual analogue scale (VAS) score and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score of all patients were significantly better postoperatively than those preoperatively (*P < 0.05), and the scores collected at each follow-up visit did not differ significantly between the two groups (P > 0.05). In the MS group, no internal fixation failure was observed during the follow-up period, but, in the HS group, two cases of internal fixation failure were observed at the last follow-up (one case of rod loosening and one case of screw breakage).

CONCLUSIONS

Both MSs and HSs fixation are effective treatments for TTBFs and have comparable clinical outcomes. In contrast, MSs fixation can improve the correction effect, better improve the SCER, and further reduce correction loss as well as reduce the incidence of instrumentation failure. Therefore, MSs fixation might be a better option for treating TTBFs in patients without neurological deficits.