Does cervical disc arthroplasty reduce adjacent segment disease and other complications in comparison to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Concurrent Session 5A - Cervical Spine: paper no. 72SUMMARY: A meta-analysis of the literature was performed to assess the development of adjacent segment degeneration/disease between cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) to that of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) at 2 and 4 year follow-up periods. Due to weaknesses in study design, heterogeneity in management, and relatively high withdrawal/drop-out rates, robust conclusions supporting the advocacy of CDA over ACDF cannot be made at this ...postprin

Pedicle Screw Surgery in the UK and Ireland: A Questionnaire Study

Pedicle screw (PS) malpositioning rates are high in spine surgery. This has resulted in the use of computed navigational aids to reduce the rate of malposition; but these are often expensive and limited in availability. A simple mechanical device to aid PS insertion might overcome some of these disadvantages. The purpose of this study was to determine the demand and design criteria for a simple device to aid PS placement, as well as to collect opinions and experiences on PS surgery in the UK and Ireland. A postal questionnaire was sent to 422 spinal surgeons in the UK and Ireland. 101 questionnaires were received; 67 of these (16% of total sent) contained useful information. 78% of surgeons experienced problems with PS placement. The need for a simple mechanical device to aid PS placement was expressed by 59% of respondent surgeons. The proportion of respondents that inserted PSs in the cervical spine was 14%; PSs are mainly inserted in the thoracic, lumbar and sacral spine, but potential exists for a PS placement aid for the cervical and thoracic spine. From the experiences of these 67 surgeons, there is evidence to suggest that surgeons would prefer a pedicle aid that is multiple use, one-piece, hand-held, radiolucent, unilateral and uses the line of sight principle in traditional open surgery. Based on the experiences of 67 surgeons, there is evidence to suggest that computed navigational aids are not readily used in PS surgery and that a simple mechanical device could be a better option. This paper provides useful data for improving the outcomes of spinal surgery

The flying buttress construct for posterior spinopelvic fixation: a technical note

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Posterior fusion of the spine to the pelvis in paediatric and adult spinal deformity is still challenging. Especially assembling of the posterior rod construct to the iliac screw is considered technically difficult. A variety of spinopelvic fixation techniques have been developed. However, extreme bending of the longitudinal rods or the use of 90-degree lateral offset connectors proved to be difficult, because the angle between the rod and the iliac screw varies from patient to patient.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We adopted a new spinopelvic fixation system, in which iliac screws are side-to-side connected to the posterior thoracolumbar rod construct, independent of the angle between the rod and the iliac screw. Open angled parallel connectors are used to connect short iliac rods from the posterior rod construct to the iliac screws at both sides. The construct resembles in form and function an architectural Flying Buttress, or lateral support arches, used in Gothic cathedrals.</p> <p>Results and discussion</p> <p>Three different cases that illustrate the Flying Buttress construct for spinopelvic fixation are reported here with the clinical details, radiographic findings and surgical technique used.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The Flying Buttress construct may offer an alternative surgical option for spinopelvic fixation in circumstances wherein coronal or sagittal balance cannot be achieved, for example in cases with significant residual pelvic obliquity, or in revision spinal surgery for failed lumbosacral fusion.</p

Surgical complications in neuromuscular scoliosis operated with posterior- only approach using pedicle screw fixation

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>There are no reports describing complications with posterior spinal fusion (PSF) with segmental spinal instrumentation (SSI) using pedicle screw fixation in patients with neuromuscular scoliosis.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Fifty neuromuscular patients (18 cerebral palsy, 18 Duchenne muscular dystrophy, 8 spinal muscular atrophy and 6 others) were divided in two groups according to severity of curves; group I (< 90°) and group II (> 90°). All underwent PSF and SSI with pedicle screw fixation. There were no anterior procedures. Perioperative (within three months of surgery) and postoperative (after three months of surgery) complications were retrospectively reviewed.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>There were fifty (37 perioperative, 13 postoperative) complications. Hemo/pneumothorax, pleural effusion, pulmonary edema requiring ICU care, complete spinal cord injury, deep wound infection and death were major complications; while atelectesis, pneumonia, mild pleural effusion, UTI, ileus, vomiting, gastritis, tingling sensation or radiating pain in lower limb, superficial infection and wound dehiscence were minor complications. Regarding perioperative complications, 34(68%) patients had at least one major or one minor complication. There were 16 patients with pulmonary, 14 with abdominal, 3 with wound related, 2 with neurological and 1 cardiovascular complications, respectively. There were two deaths, one due to cardiac arrest and other due to hypovolemic shock. Regarding postoperative complications 7 patients had coccygodynia, 3 had screw head prominence, 2 had bed sore and 1 had implant loosening, respectively. There was a significant relationship between age and increased intraoperative blood loss (p = 0.024). However it did not increased complications or need for ICU care. Similarly intraoperative blood loss > 3500 ml, severity of curve or need of pelvic fixation did not increase the complication rate or need for ICU. DMD patients had higher chances of coccygodynia postoperatively.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Although posterior-only approach using pedicle screw fixation had good correction rate, complications were similar to previous reports. There were few unusual complications like coccygodynia.</p