Clinical Results of Anterior Odontoid Screw Fixation for Type II Odontoid Fractures

AmAÇ: Çalışmada, Tip II odontoid fraktürü tanısı alan 31 olgu bildirilmiştir. Olguların hepsi anterior transodontoid vida fiksasyonu ile tedavi edilmiş ve klinik sonuçları bildirilmiştir. yÖNTEm ve GEREÇLER: Çalışma, VKV Amerikan Hastanesi Nöroşirürji Bölümü'nde 1998-2012 yılları arasında travmatik tip II odontoid kırığı nedeniyle anterior transodontoid fiksasyon ile cerrahi tedavi uygulanan 31 hastanın retrospektif klinik analizleri yapılmıştır. Tüm olguların yaş, cinsiyet, travma nedeni, teşhis zamanı, cerrahi girişim öncesi ve sonrasında nörolojik muayeneleri, takip süresi değerlendirilmiştir. Olguların nörolojik durumları Frankel skalasına göre sınıflandırılmıştır. BuLGuLAR: Dört hastaya 2 adet transodontoid vidası yerleştirildi. Hastanede kalış süresi ortalama 3,35 gün idi. 1 hastada postop takibinde füzyon oluşmaması nedeniyle ikinci bir operasyon ile posteriordan oksipitoservikal füzyon yapıldı. İşlem sırasında ve sonrasında damar yaralanması, vida malpozisyonu, enfeksiyon, nörolojik bozulma gibi komplikasyonlar izlenmedi. Hastalar ameliyat sonrasında ortalama 36 ay takip edildi. Hastaların erken ve geç dönemde radyolojik görüntülemeleri yapıldı. soNuÇ: Postoperatif dönemde hastaların takiplerinde tatmin edici füzyon oranı ve hasta konforunun daha iyi olduğunu saptadık. Tip II odontoid kırıklarının cerrahi tedavisinde minimal invaziv yöntem olan transodontoid vida ile fiksasyonun yüksek avantajlarından dolayı ilk seçenek olabileceğini düşünüyoruz.AIm: In this study, 31 patients with a diagnosis of Type II odontoid fractures were reported. All patients were treated with anterior transodontoid screw fixation and clinical outcomes were reported. mATERIAL and mETHods: In this study, the retrospective clinical analysis of 31 patients with traumatic type II odontoid fractures who were treated through anterior transodontoid fixation in Neurosurgery Department at VKV American Hospital between 1998 and 2012 was performed. The age, sex, cause of injury, diagnosis time, neurological examination before and after surgery, follow-up period were evaluated. The neurological status of patients was classified according to the Frankel scale. REsuLTs: In 4 patients, 2 transodontoid screws were inserted. The mean hospital stay was 3.35 days. Posterior occipito-cervical fusion was done in 1 patient due to the lack of fusion in the first operation. No vascular injury, screw malposition, infection, neurologic deterioration, or complications were observed during the peroperative and postoperative stage. The mean postoperative follow-up period was 36 months after surgery. Radiological imaging of patients were performed at the early and late postoperative stage. CoNCLusIoN: We found satisfying fusion rates and better patient comfort during the postoperative period. We think that stabilization and fusion through a transodontoid screw is a minimal invasive method

A combined diagnosis and treatment algorithm for spine infection management: A single-center experience

Background and objectiveSpinal infection (SI) is an infectious disease affecting the vertebral column, spinal cord, and adjacent structures. The infection can occur following interventions or spontaneously. The aim of this study was to highlight the importance of employing a methodological approach for the accurate and rapid diagnosis of SI and to share information on the most effective treatment method, which involves using a diagnostic -treatment algorithm that can help with SI management.MethodologyThis study included 50 patients diagnosed with SI between 2016 and 2020. The treatment follow-up period was limited to six months, and the study was conducted as a retrospective cohort analysis. The sample consisted of 22 female patients and 28 male patients, and the mean age of the patients was 50.2 years. All patients received diagnosis and treatment according to the algorithm described in this article.ResultsIn the study group, 60% of patients had an infection in the lumbar spine, 4% in the thoracal spine, 12% in the cervical spine, and 8% in the sacral spine. Previously operated patients were diagnosed on the 30.16th day on average. A total of 19 patients (38%) had no history of undergoing surgery. Radiologically, the most common finding was spondylodiscitis/discitis (32%). Osteomyelitis was detected in one (2%) patient. Methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) was the most commonly isolated organism in culture results and was detected in 13 patients (26%). The culture results of 12 patients (24%) were negative. The number of patients with active SI who were unstable and stabilized at the time of diagnosis was 11 (22%), and stabilization materials were removed in two patients (4%). In the 6th month of control, the patients did not have any complaints, signs of an infection, or unstable vertebral column.ConclusionsWe conclude that the combined algorithm we recommend for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with SI can prevent negative deviation and is an effective treatment for this condition

Lumbar single-level dynamic stabilization with semi-rigid and full dynamic systems: A retrospective clinical and radiological analysis of 71 patients

WOS: 000411033200008PubMed ID: 28861198Background: This study compares the clinical and radiological results of three most commonly used dynamic stabilization systems in the field of orthopedic surgery. Methods: A total of 71 patients underwent single-level posterior transpedicular dynamic stabilization between 2011 and 2014 due to lumbar degenerative disc disease. Three different dynamic systems used include: (1) the Dynesys system; (2) a dynamic screw with a PEEK rod; and (3) a full dynamic system (a dynamic screw with a dynamic rod; BalanC). The mean patient age was 45.8 years. The mean follow-up was 29.7 months. Clinical and radiological data were obtained for each patient preoperatively and at 6, 12, and 24 months of follow-up. Results: Clinical outcomes were significantly improved in all patients. There were no significant differences in the radiological outcomes among the groups divided according to the system used. Screw loosening was detected in 2 patients, and 1 patient developed screw breakage. All patients with screw loosening or breakage underwent revision surgery. Conclusions: Each procedure offered satisfactory outcome regardless of which system was applied

Complications of 2-level dynamic stabilization: A correlative clinical and radiological analysis at two-year follow-up on 103 patients

WOS: 000443444000010PubMed ID: 30192368AIM: To investigate the postoperative complications, such as screw loosening, screw breakage and adjacent segment disease (ASD), in patients who underwent surgery with 2-level dynamic stabilization systems. MATERIAL and METHODS: Postoperative complications, clinical improvements and radiological parameters in patients who underwent surgery using a dynamic system for 2-level lumbar stabilization were retrospectively reviewed. A total of 103 patients with lumbar degenerative spinal instability underwent 2-level dynamic stabilization. Clinical findings were reviewed at 2-year follow-up. Screw breakage and loosening were evaluated during this duration together with clinical findings. RESULTS: Visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores were significantly decreased at the four-month evaluation, and they were also decreased at the 1-year follow up and at the 24th postoperative month. ASD was diagnosed in twelve (8 females, 4 males) of the 103 patients in the follow-up radiological and clinical controls. There were 9 screw breakages and 4 screw loosening cases. The complication rate of 2-level dynamic stabilization was high in this study. CONCLUSION: Our results showed that complications (screw loosening or breakage and adjacent segment disease) are not rare after 2-level dynamic stabilization, unlike the acceptable results with the single-level dynamic system. The most probable explanation is that the instrument system behaves more rigidly with every additional segment

Posterior transpedicular dynamic systems in the treatment of chronic lumbar ınstability

İstanbul Bilim Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi.Dynamic stabilization is a new concept and a new technology in spinal stabilization. There are a lot of debates on this topic and most of the criticisms may be true; however, it should be kept in mind that every technology develops from necessity. If fusion could solve all the problems, scientists would not try to develop other solutions

A Rehabilitation Protocol for Patients with Lumbar Degenerative Disc Disease Treated with Posterior Transpedicular Dynamic Stabilization

AIm: To evaluate the efficacy of the rehabilitation protocol on patients with lumbar degenerative disc disease after posterior transpedicular dynamic stabilization (PTDS) surgery. mATERIAl and mEThODS: Patients (n=50) with single level lumbar degenerative disc disease were recruited for this study. Patients had PTDS surgery with hinged screws. A rehabilitation program was applied for all patients. Phase 1 was the preoperative evaluation phase. Phase 2 (active rest phase) was the first 6 weeks after surgery. During phase 3 (minimal movement phase, 6-12 weeks) pelvic tilt exercises initiated. In phase 4 (dynamic phase, 3-6 months) dynamic lumbar stabilization exercises were started. Phase 5 (return to sports phase) began after the 6th month. The primary outcome criteria were the Visual Analogue Pain Score (VAS) and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Patients were evaluated preoperatively, postoperative 3rd, 12th and 24th months. RESUlTS: The mean preoperative VAS and ODI scores were 7.52±0.97 and 60.96±8.74, respectively. During the 3rd month, VAS and ODI scores decreased to 2.62±1.05 and 26.2±7.93, respectively. VAS and ODI scores continued to decrease during the 12thmonth after surgery to 1.4±0.81 and 13.72±6.68, respectively. At the last follow-up (mean 34.1 months) the VAS and ODI scores were found to be 0.68±0.62 and 7.88±3.32, respectively. (p=0.0001). CONClUSION: The protocol was designed for a postoperative rehabilitation program after PTDS surgery for patients with lumbar degenerative disc disease. The good outcomes are the result of a combination of very careful and restrictive patient selection, surgical technique, and the presented rehabilitation program