1
|
Zhang Y, Song J, Lu Y, Yi M, Xu X, Ding L. A practical method for the retrieval of tulip-head polyaxial pedicle screw by reusing the rod in revision and implants removal surgery: introduction of technique and evaluation of clinical outcomes. BMC Surg 2023; 23:152. [PMID: 37280570 DOI: 10.1186/s12893-023-02063-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/24/2022] [Accepted: 05/31/2023] [Indexed: 06/08/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The removal of spinal implants is needed in revision surgery or in some cases whose fracture had healed or fusion had occurred. The slip of polyaxial screw or mismatch of instruments would make this simple procedure intractable. Here we introduce a simple and practical method to address this clinical dilemma. METHODS This is a retrospective study. The patients underwent new technique for retrieving the implants from July 2019 to July 2022 were labeled as group A, while the patients underwent traditional implants retrieval technique from January 2017 to January 2020 were labeled as group B. Patients in each group were subdivided into revision surgery group (r group) and simple implants removal group (s group) according to the surgery fashion. For the new technique, the retrieved rod was cut off to a proper length which was matched with the size of tulip head, and was replaced into the tulip head. After tightened with nut, a monoaxial screw-rod "construct" was formed. Then the "construct" can be retrieved by a counter torque. The operation duration, intraoperative blood loss, post-operative bacteria culture, hospital stay and costs were analyzed. RESULTS A total of 116 polyaxial screws with difficult retrieval (43 screws in group A, 73 screws in group B) in 78 patients were recorded, in which 115 screws were successfully retrieved. Significant differences were found in the mean operation duration, intraoperative blood loss when comparing the r group in group A and B, as well as the s group in group A and B (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in hospital stay and costs between group A and B. Three patients were found positive bacteria culture of drainage tube/tape in group A (3/30), while 7 patients in group B (7/48). The most prevalent bacteria was Propionibacterium acnes. CONCLUSION This technique is practical and safe in retrieving tulip head poly-axial screw. Reduced operation duration and intraoperative bloods loss may potentially alleviate the hospitalization burden of patients. Positive bacterial cultivation results are common after implants removal surgery, but they rarely represent an organized infection. A positive culture with P. acnes or S. epidermidis should be interpreted with caution.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yao Zhang
- Department of Spinal Surgery, Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, No. 10, Tieyi Road, Yangfangdian street, Haidian District, Beijing, 10038, People's Republic of China
| | - Jipeng Song
- Department of Spinal Surgery, Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, No. 10, Tieyi Road, Yangfangdian street, Haidian District, Beijing, 10038, People's Republic of China
| | - Yuzheng Lu
- Department of Spinal Surgery, Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, No. 10, Tieyi Road, Yangfangdian street, Haidian District, Beijing, 10038, People's Republic of China
| | - Meng Yi
- Department of Spinal Surgery, Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, No. 10, Tieyi Road, Yangfangdian street, Haidian District, Beijing, 10038, People's Republic of China
| | - Xiaohang Xu
- Department of Spinal Surgery, Yantai Affiliated Hospital of Binzhou Medical College, No. 717, Jinbu Street, Yantai, Shandong, 264000, People's Republic of China
| | - Lixiang Ding
- Department of Spinal Surgery, Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, No. 10, Tieyi Road, Yangfangdian street, Haidian District, Beijing, 10038, People's Republic of China.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
The Necessity of Implant Removal after Fixation of Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures—A Systematic Review. J Clin Med 2023; 12:jcm12062213. [PMID: 36983216 PMCID: PMC10057639 DOI: 10.3390/jcm12062213] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/06/2023] [Revised: 02/24/2023] [Accepted: 02/27/2023] [Indexed: 03/14/2023] Open
Abstract
Background: Thoracolumbar burst fractures are a common traumatic vertebral fracture in the spine, and pedicle screw fixation has been widely performed as a safe and effective procedure. However, after the stabilization of the thoracolumbar burst fractures, whether or not to remove the pedicle screw implant remains controversial. This review aimed to assess the benefits and risks of pedicle screw instrument removal after fixation of thoracolumbar burst fractures. Methods: Data sources, including PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Clinical trials.gov, were comprehensively searched. All types of human studies that reported the benefits and risks of implant removal after thoracolumbar burst fractures, were selected for inclusion. Clinical outcomes after implant removal were collected for further evaluation. Results: A total of 4051 papers were retrieved, of which 35 studies were eligible for inclusion in the review, including four case reports, four case series, and 27 observational studies. The possible risks of pedicle screw removal after fixation of thoracolumbar burst fractures include the progression of the kyphotic deformity and surgical complications (e.g., surgical site infection, neurovascular injury, worsening pain, revision surgery), while the potential benefits of pedicle screw removal mainly include improved segmental range of motion and alleviated pain and disability. Therefore, the potential benefits and possible risks should be weighed to support patient-specific clinical decision-making about the removal of pedicle screws after the successful fusion of thoracolumbar burst fractures. Conclusions: There was conflicting evidence regarding the benefits and harms of implant removal after successful fixation of thoracolumbar burst fractures, and the current literature does not support the general recommendation for removal of the pedicle screw instruments, which may expose the patients to unnecessary complications and costs. Both surgeons and patients should be aware of the indications and have appropriate expectations of the benefits and risks of implant removal. The decision to remove the implant or not should be made individually and cautiously by the surgeon in consultation with the patient. Further studies are warranted to clarify this issue. Level of evidence: level 1.
Collapse
|