European Spine Journal

, Volume 21, Issue 10, pp 2034–2042 | Cite as

Retrospective analysis of treatment of thoracolumbar burst fracture using mono-segment pedicle instrumentation compared with short-segment pedicle instrumentation

  • Xilei Li
  • Yiqun Ma
  • Jian Dong
  • Xiao-gang Zhou
  • Juan Li
Chinese section
First Online:
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:

Abstract

Objective

To investigate the safety and therapeutic effects of mono-segmental pedicle instrumentation (MSPI) in treating thoracolumbar burst fracture (AO classification: A3.1 and A3.2).

Methods

A retrospective analysis was conducted on 60 cases with thoracolumbar burst fracture (AO classification: A3.1 and A3.2) between April 2005 and February 2010. Half of the 60 inpatients were treated with MSPI, and the other half was treated with short-segment pedicle instrumentation (SSPI). The mean operation time, blood loss, visual analog scale (VAS) and vertebral kyphotic angle before and after surgery were compared.

Results

In the MSPI group, the mean operation time was 90 ± 25 min, and the blood loss at operation was 180 ± 62 ml. The vertebral kyphotic angles were 17.3° ± 9.3° before surgery, 6.5° ± 6.5° one week after surgery, and 9.5° ± 6.4° for the latest follow-up. The VAS scores were 7.5 ± 1.4 before surgery, 2.5 ± 0.7 one week after surgery, and 1.4 ± 0.8 for the latest follow-up. In the SSPI group, the mean operation time was 101 ± 28 min, and the blood loss at operation was 203 ± 88 ml. The follow-up duration was 12–64 months. The vertebral kyphotic angles were 16.5° ± 9.1° before surgery, 7.1° ± 6.9° one week after surgery, and 7.5° ± 5.2° for the latest follow-up. The VAS scores were 6.7 ± 1.5 before surgery, 3.0 ± 0.4 one week after surgery, and 1.1 ± 0.6 for the latest follow-up. There were no statistically significant differences between these two groups in the operation time, blood loss at operation, VAS score and vertebral kyphotic angle before and after surgery (p > 0.05). The post-surgical VAS scores and vertebral kyphotic angles were significantly decreased in both groups, compared to before surgery (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

It is safe and effective to treat thoracolumbar burst fractures (AO 3.1 and AO 3.2) with MSPI. The mean operation time, blood loss at operation, post-surgical VAS and vertebral kyphotic angle of the MSPI group are similar, compared to the SSPI group. Further research is needed to find out whether therapeutic effects of MSPI are better than those of conservative treatment in these cases.

Keywords

Spinal fractures Fracture fixation Mono-segmental pedicle instrumentation Short-segment pedicle instrumentation 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was supported partly by Natural Science Foundation of China (30970718, 31170925), Program for Outstanding Academic Leader of Shanghai (LJ10017), International cooperation projects of Shanghai: technology innovation action plan (09410702700) and key projects of Shanghai science and technology commission: technology innovation action plan (08411952500).

Conflict of interest

None.

References

  1. 1.
    Denis F (1983) The three column spine and its significance in the classification of acute thoracolumbar spinal injuries. Spine 8(8):817–831. doi: 10.1097/00007632-198301000-00021 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Danisa OA, Shaffrey CI, Jane JA et al (1995) Surgical approaches for the correction of unstable thoracolumbar burst fractures: a retrospective analysis of treatment outcomes. J Neurosurg 83(6):977–983. doi: 10.3171/jns.1995.83.6.0977 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cho DY, Lee WY, Sheu PC (2003) Treatment of thoracolumbar burst fractures with polymethyl methacrylate vertebroplasty and short-segment pedicle screw fixation. Neurosurgery 53(6):1354–1361. doi: 10.1227/01.NEU.0000093200.74828.2F PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    McLain RF (2006) The biomechanics of long versus short fixation for thoracolumbar spine fractures. Spine 31(11 Suppl):S70–S79. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000218221.47230.dd PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Parker JW, Lane JR, Karaikovic EE et al (2000) Successful short-segment instrumentation and fusion for thoracolumbar spine fractures: a consecutive 41/2-year series. Spine 25(9):1157–1170. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200005010-00018 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Schnee CL, Ansell LV (1997) Selection criteria and outcome of operative approaches for thoracolumbar burst fractures with and without neurological deficit. J Neurosurg 86(1):48–55. doi: 10.3171/jns.1997.86.1.0048 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Magerl F, Aebi M, Gertzbein SD et al (1994) A comprehensive classification of thoracic and lumbar injuries. Eur Spine J 3(4):184–201. doi: 10.1007/BF02221591 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Aebi M (2010) Classification of thoracolumbar fractures and dislocations. Eur Spine J 19:S2–S7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Esses SI, Botsford DJ, Kostuik JP (1990) Evaluation of surgical treatment for burst fractures. Spine 15(7):667–673. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199007000-00010 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Alanay A, Acaroglu E, Yazici M et al (2001) Short-segment pedicle instrumentation of thoracolumbar burst fractures: does transpedicular intracorporeal grafting prevent early failure? Spine 26(2):213–217. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200101150-00017 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Criscitiello AA, Fredrickson BE (1997) Thoracolumbar spine injuries. Orthopedics 20(10):939–944PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    McCormack T, Karaikovic E, Gaines RW (1994) The load sharing classification of spine fractures. Spine 19(15):1741–1744. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199408000-00014 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Scholl BM, Theiss SM, Kirkpatrick JS (2006) Short segment fixation of thoracolumbar burst fractures. Orthopedics 29(8):703–708PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Farrokhi MR, Razmkon A, Maghami Z, Nikoo Z (2010) Inclusion of the fracture level in short segment fixation of thoracolumbar fractures. Eur Spine J 19:1651–1656PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ge CM, Wang YR, Jiang SD, Jiang LS (2011) Thoracolumbar burst fractures with a neurological deficit treated with posterior decompression and interlaminar fusion. Eur Spine J 20(12):2195–2201Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wawro W, Konrad L, Aebi M (1994) Single segment internal fixator device in treatment of thoracolumbar vertebral fractures. Unfallchirurg 97:114–120PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Roy-Camille R, Saillant G, Mazel C (1986) Plating of thoracic, thoracolumbar, and lumbar injuries with pedicle screw plates. Orthop Clin North Am 17(1):147–159PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dvorak MF, Kwon BK, Fisher CG et al (2003) Effectiveness of titanium mesh cylindrical cages in anterior column reconstruction after thoracic and lumbar vertebral body resection. Spine 30:902–908. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200305010-00012 Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Umehara S, Zindrick MR, Patwardhan AG et al (2000) The biomechanical effect of postoperative hypolordosis in instrumented lumbar fusion on instrumented and adjacent spinal segments. Spine 25:1617–1624. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200007010-00004 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wang ST, Ma HL, Liu CL et al (2006) Is fusion necessary for surgically treated burst fractures of the thoracolumbar and lumbar spine? : a prospective, randomized study. Spine 31:2646–2653. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000244555.28310.40 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wei FX, Liu SY, Zhang WD et al (2007) Biomechanical evaluation of monosegmental versus bisegmental fixation by pedicle instrumentation in the management of thoracolumbar fracture. Chin J spine spinal cord 17:46–50. doi: CNKI:SUN:ZJZS.0.2007-01-012 Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Liu S, Li H, Liang C, Long H et al (2009) Monosegmental transpedicular fixation for selected patients with thoracolumbar burst fractures. J Spinal Disord Tech 22(1):38–44. doi: 10.1097/BSD.0b013e3181679ba3 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hai Y, Wang QY, Zhang CS et al (2008) Treatment of the thoracolumbar spine fracture with posterior monosegment pedicle fixation at the injured level. J cap med university 29:686–689. doi: CNKI:SUN:SDYD.0.2008-06-007 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Xilei Li
    • 1
  • Yiqun Ma
    • 1
  • Jian Dong
    • 1
  • Xiao-gang Zhou
    • 1
  • Juan Li
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Zhongshan HospitalFudan UniversityShanghaiChina

Personalised recommendations