Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Revision surgery after PSO failure with rod breakage: a comparison of different techniques

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Spine Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Study design

Author experience and literature review.

Objectives

To compare different revision techniques in the treatment of implant failure after pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO).

Summary of background data

The complication rate of pedicle subtraction osteotomy is substantially higher than other corrective procedures available for the treatment of spinal sagittal imbalance: in particular, hardware failures and mechanical complications affect this technique and their biomechanical explanation is still purely speculative.

Methods

The author’s experience and the literature regarding the revision techniques for PSO failures are discussed.

Results

In this paper, eight consecutive revision cases due to rod breakage after PSO surgery are reported. In our experience, the main goals are to restore the spinal balance, through a posterior approach (correction and hardware revision and implementation) and to get a solid anterior fusion (both through a traditional anterior approach or minimally invasive transpsoas approach).

Conclusion

The efficacy of PSO should be balanced with the high risk of the procedure reported in the literature. Management of revision surgery after PSO may require the addition of anterior column support to maintain correction and reduce complications.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bridwell KH, Lewis SJ, Lenke LG et al (2003) Pedicle subtraction osteotomy for the treatment of fixed sagittal imbalance. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85:454–463

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Thomasen E (1985) Vertebral osteotomy for correction of kyphosis in ankylosing spondylitis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 194:142–152

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Bridwell K, Lewis SJ, Edwards C et al (2003) Complications and outcomes of pedicle subtraction osteotomies for fixed sagittal imbalance. Spine 28:2093–3101

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Berven SH, Deviren V, Smith JA (2001) Management of fixed sagittal plane deformity: results of the transpedicular wedge resection osteotomy. Spine 26:2036–2043

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Bridwell KH (2006) Decision making regarding Smith–Petersen vs. pedicle subtraction osteotomy vs. vertebral column resection for spinal deformity. Spine 31(19 Suppl):S171–S178

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Kim Y et al (2007) Results of lumbar pedicle subtraction osteotomies for fixed sagittal imbalance. A minimum 5-year follow-up study. Spine 32(20):2189–2197

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Thambiraj S, Boszczyk BM (2012) Asymmetric osteotomy of the spine for coronal imbalance: a technical report. Eur Spine J 21(Suppl 2):S225–S229

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Smith J et al (2011) Short-term morbidity and mortality associated with correction of thoracolumbar fixed sagittal plane deformity. Spine 36(12):958–964

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Smith JS, Shaffrey CI, Ames CP et al (2012) Assessment of symptomatic rod fracture after posterior instrumented fusion for adult spinal deformity. Neurosurgery 71:862–868

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Cho KS et al (2012) Major complications in revision adult deformity surgery. Risk factors and clinical outcomes with 2- to 7-year follow-up. Spine 37(6):489–500

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Berjano P et al (2013) Failures and revisions in surgery for sagittal imbalance: analysis of factors influencing failure. Eur Spine J 22(Suppl 6):S853–S858

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Charosky S, Moreno P, Maxy P (2014) Instability and instrumentation failures after a PSO: a finite element analysis. Eur Spine J (in press)

  13. Enercan M et al (2013) Osteotomies/spinal column resection in adult deformity. Eur Spine J 22(Suppl 2):S254–S264

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 3rd Spine Surgery Division, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan, Italy

    A. Luca, A. Lovi & M. Brayda-Bruno

  2. Laboratory of Biological Structure Mechanics, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan, Italy

    F. Galbusera

Authors
  1. A. Luca
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. Lovi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. F. Galbusera
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. M. Brayda-Bruno
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. Luca.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Luca, A., Lovi, A., Galbusera, F. et al. Revision surgery after PSO failure with rod breakage: a comparison of different techniques. Eur Spine J 23 (Suppl 6), 610–615 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-014-3555-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-014-3555-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation