Different pedicle osteosynthesis for thoracolumbar vertebral fractures in elderly patients
Pedicle screws’ stability, especially in osteoporotic fractures, is a really problem for spinal surgeons. Nowadays, little is known about the influence of different screw types and amount of cement applied. This single-center retrospective observational study has the aim of evaluating the middle- to long-term mechanical performances of different types of screws in elderly patients with thoracolumbar fractures.
Materials and methods
A total of 91 patients (37 males and 54 females), treated between 2011 and 2016, affected by somatic osteoporotic fractures aged over 65 years were treated. We divided patients into three different populations: solid screws, cannulated screws and cannulated screws augmented with poly methyl methacrylate cement (PMMA). Patients were radiologically evaluated with X-rays in pre- and post-surgery and at the follow-up (FU). Clinical evaluations were made with VAS and Oswestry Disability Index.
A total of 636 screws were implanted (222 pedicle screws, 190 cannulated and 224 cannulated screws with PMMA augmentation). At FU, we found significative differences between populations in terms of mechanical performances. We founded five cases of loosening; these were reported in solid screws group and in cannulated screws one. No mechanical failures were reported in cannulated screws with augmentation of PMMA. No rods breakage cases were reported.
All stabilization methods showed good clinical results, but cannulated screws augmented with PMMA seem to provide better implant stability with the lowest rate of loosening.
KeywordsCannulated screws with PMMA augmentation Screw’s loosening Vertebral fractures in osteoporosis Vertebral fractures surgical treatment Long-term results in surgical treatment of vertebral fractures
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
All authors declare no conflict of interest regarding the subject of this study.
- 3.Chotigavanich C, Sanpakit S, Wantthanaapisith T, Thanapipatsiri S, Chotigavanich C (2009) The surgical treatment of the osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture in the elderly patients with the spinal instrumentation. J Med Assoc Thail Chotmaihet thangphaet 92(Suppl 5):S109–S115Google Scholar
- 5.Kado DM, Miller-Martinez D, Lui LY, Cawthon P, Katzman WB, Hillier TA, Fink HA, Ensrud KE (2014) Hyperkyphosis, kyphosis progression, and risk of non-spine fractures in older community dwelling women: the study of osteoporotic fractures (SOF). J Bone Miner Res 29(10):2210–2216CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 6.Yasuda T, Kawaguchi Y, Suzuki K, Nakano M, Seki S, Watabnabe K, Kanamori M, Kimura T (2017) Five-year follow up results of posterior decompression and fixation surgery for delayed neural disorder associated with osteoporotic vertebral fracture. Medicine 96(51):e9395. https://doi.org/10.1097/md.0000000000009395 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 8.Vaccaro RA, Oner C, Kepler CK, Dvorak M, Schnake K, Bellabarba C, Reinold M, Aarabi B, Kandziora F, Chapman J, Shanmuganathan R, Fehlings M, Vialle L (2013) AOSpine thoracolumbar spine injury classification system. Fracture description, neurological status, and key modifiers. Spine 38(23):2028–2037CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 11.Jackson SA (1999) The epidemiology of aging. In: Hazzart WR, Blass JP, Ettinger WH, Halter JB, Ouslander JP (eds) Principles of geriatric medicine and gerontology, 4th edn. McGraw-Hill Book Co, New York, pp 203–225Google Scholar