Advertisement

Der Chirurg

, Volume 83, Issue 10, pp 866–874 | Cite as

Osteoporotische Wirbelkörperfrakturen der thorakolumbalen Wirbelsäule

Diagnostik und Behandlungsstrategien
  • C. JostenEmail author
  • C. Schmidt
  • U. Spiegl
Leitthema

Zusammenfassung

Thorakolumbale Wirbelkörperfrakturen können bei entsprechender Osteoporose bereits ohne relevantes Unfallereignis auftreten. Initial steht die korrekte Diagnostik, das Erkennen frischer Wirbelkörperläsionen unter Beurteilung der Stabilität, im Vordergrund. Ziel der Therapie ist es, eine möglichst rasche und schmerzarme Mobilisation unter Erhalt des physiologischen Wirbelsäulenalignments zu erreichen. Dementsprechend besitzt bei entsprechend stabiler Frakturmorphologie das konservative Management oberste Priorität. Im Falle von Schmerzpersistenz sowie Nachsinterungstendenz kommen minimal-invasive Zementaugmentationsverfahren zum Einsatz. Instabile Frakturformen benötigen demgegenüber eine 360°-Versorgung im Sinne einer Hybridstabilisierung. Insbesondere bei Revisionseingriffen sind aber aufwendige und langstreckige Verfahren erforderlich. Dabei sollte die Instrumentierung unbedingt über den Scheitelpunkt der Kyphose hinausgehen.

Schlüsselwörter

Osteoporotische Wirbelkörperfraktur Wirbelsäulenalignment Hybridstabilisierung Kyphoplastie Revisionseingriffe 

Osteoporotic vertebral body fractures of the thoracolumbar spine

Diagnostics and therapeutic strategies

Abstract

In cases of severe osteoporosis vertebral body fractures of the thoracolumbar spine can occur without any relevant trauma. Initially, a standardized diagnostic algorithm is recommended to detect acute vertebral body fractures and to be able to interpret the individual fracture stability. Aim of the therapy is to assure a relatively pain-free mobilization while maintaining vertebral spine alignment. A conservative therapy concept is initiated in patients with stable fractures. In cases of persistent pain, reduced mobility or increased kyphotic misalignment minimally invasive cement augmented therapy strategies are chosen. In cases of unstable fracture morphology a more complex therapy concept has to be chosen such as hybrid stabilization. A great deal of experience is needed for revision surgery. In such cases reconstructive, multi-segmental techniques might be necessary and the instrumentation should surpass the apex of kyphosis.

Keywords

Osteoporotic vertebral body fractures Hybrid stabilization Kyphoplasty Alignment Revision surgery 

Notes

Interessenkonflikt

Die korrespondierende Autor weist für sich und seine Koautoren auf folgende Beziehungen hin: Beratervertrag mit der Firma Synthes.

Literatur

  1. 1.
    Heyde CE, Rohlmann A, Weber U, Kayser R (2010) Stabilization of the osteoporotic spine from a biomechanical viewpoint. Orthopaede 39:407–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Adams MA, Pollintine P, Tobias JH et al (2006) Intervertebral disc degeneration can predispose to anterior vertebral fractures in the thoracolumbar spine. J Bone Miner Res 21:1409–1416PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Blattert TR, Glasmacher S, Riesner HJ, Josten C (2009) Revision characteristics of cement-augmented, cannulated-fenestrated pedicle screws in the osteoporotic vertebral body: a biomechanical in vitro investigation. Technical note. J Neurosurg Spine 11:23–27PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Spiegl UJ, Beisse R, Hauck S et al (2009) Value of MRI imaging prior to a kyphoplasty for osteoporotic insufficiency fractures. Eur Spine J 18:1287–1292PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Josten C, Katscher S, Gonschorek O (2005) Treatment concepts for fractures of the thoracolumbar junction and lumbar spine. Orthopaede 34:1021–1032CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Longo UG, Loppini M, Denaro L et al (2012) Conservative management of patients with an osteoporotic vertebral fracture: a review of the literature. J Bone Joint Surg 94:152–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Buhren V (2003) Injuries to the thoracic and lumbar spine. Unfallchirurg 106:55–68 (quiz 68–59)PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Franc J, Lehmann P, Saliou G et al (2010) Vertebroplasty: 10 years clinical and radiological follow-up. Journal of neuroradiology Journal de neuroradiologie 37:211–219PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kallmes DF, Comstock BA, Heagerty PJ et al (2009) A randomized trial of vertebroplasty for osteoporotic spinal fractures. N Engl J Med 361:569–579PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Klazen CA, Lohle PN, de Vries J et al (2010) Vertebroplasty versus conservative treatment in acute osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (Vertos II): an open-label randomised trial. Lancet 376:1085–1092PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gerling MC, Eubanks JD, Patel R et al (2011) Cement augmentation of refractory osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures: survivorship analysis. Spine 36:E1266–1269PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Klezl Z, Majeed H, Bommireddy R, John J (2011) Early results after vertebral body stenting for fractures of the anterior column of the thoracolumbar spine. Injury 42:1038–1042PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pflugmacher R, Bornemann R, Koch EM et al (2012) Comparison of clinical and radiological data in the treatment of patients with osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures using radiofrequency kyphoplasty or balloon kyphoplasty. Z Orthop Unfallchir 150:56–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lunt M, O’Neill TW, Felsenberg D et al European Prospective Osteoporosis Study G (2003) Characteristics of a prevalent vertebral deformity predict subsequent vertebral fracture: results from the European Prospective Osteoporosis Study (EPOS). Bone 33:505–513PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Aquarius R, Homminga J, Verdonschot N, Tanck E (2011) The fracture risk of adjacent vertebrae is increased by the changed loading direction after a wedge fracture. Spine 36:E408–E412PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Katzman WB, Vittinghoff E, Ensrud K et al (2011) Increasing kyphosis predicts worsening mobility in older community-dwelling women: a prospective cohort study. J Am Geriatr Soc 59:96–100PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Taylor RS, Fritzell P, Taylor RJ (2007) Balloon kyphoplasty in the management of vertebral compression fractures: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Spine J 16:1085–1100PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Yan D, Duan L, Li J et al (2011) Comparative study of percutaneous vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty in the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 131:645–650PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Berlemann U, Franz T, Orler R, Heini PF (2004) Kyphoplasty for treatment of osteoporotic vertebral fractures: a prospective non-randomized study. Eur Spine J 13:496–501PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Movrin I, Vengust R, Komadina R (2010) Adjacent vertebral fractures after percutaneous vertebral augmentation of osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture: a comparison of balloon kyphoplasty and vertebroplasty. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 130:1157–1166PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rho YJ, Choe WJ, Chun YI (2012) Risk factors predicting the new symptomatic vertebral compression fractures after percutaneous vertebroplasty or kyphoplasty. Eur Spine J 21:905–911PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    DePalma MJ, Ketchum JM, Frankel BM, Frey ME (2011) Percutaneous vertebroplasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures in the nonagenarians: a prospective study evaluating pain reduction and new symptomatic fracture rate. Spine 36:277–282PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Blattert TR, Katscher S, Josten C (2011) Percutaneous techniques in the thoracic and lumbar spine. Unfallchirurg 114:17–25PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Magerl F, Aebi M, Gertzbein SD et al (1994) A comprehensive classification of thoracic and lumbar injuries. Eur Spine J 3:184–201PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rodriguez-Vela J, Lobo-Escolar A, Joven-Aliaga E et al (2009) Perioperative and short-term advantages of mini-open approach for lumbar spinal fusion. Eur Spine J 18:1194–1201PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wittenberg RH, Shea M, Swartz DE et al (1991) Importance of bone mineral density in instrumented spine fusions. Spine 16:647–652PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Korovessis P, Hadjipavlou A, Repantis T (2008) Minimal invasive short posterior instrumentation plus balloon kyphoplasty with calcium phosphate for burst and severe compression lumbar fractures. Spine 33:658–667PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Uchida K, Nakajima H, Yayama T et al (2010) Vertebroplasty-augmented short-segment posterior fixation of osteoporotic vertebral collapse with neurological deficit in the thoracolumbar spine: comparisons with posterior surgery without vertebroplasty and anterior surgery. J Neurosurg Spine 13:612–621PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Gonschorek O, Spiegl U, Weiss T et al (2011) Reconstruction after spinal fractures in the thoracolumbar region. Unfallchirurg 114:26–34PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Klinik und Poliklinik für Unfall-, Wiederherstellungs- und Plastische Chirurgie, WirbelsäulenzentrumUniversitätsklinik LeipzigLeipzigDeutschland

Personalised recommendations