Influence of double rods and interbody cages on quasistatic range of motion of the spine after lumbopelvic instrumentation

Purpose This in vitro biomechanical study compares residual lumbar range of motion (ROM) and rod strain after lumbopelvic instrumentation using 2 rods, 4 rods and interbody cages. Methods Seven human cadaveric specimens were instrumented from L1 to sacrum, and pelvic screws were implanted. The pelvis was constrained and moments up to 7.5 Nm were applied to T12. Segmental L1–S1 ROM was analyzed by tracking radiopaque balls implanted in each vertebra using biplanar radiographs. Deformation within principal rods was measured by strain gauges. Four configurations were compared: 2 rods (2R), 4 rods (4R), 4 rods + ALIF at L4–L5 and L5–S1 (4R + ALIF), 2 rods + ALIF (2R + ALIF). Results Intact average global L1–S1 ROM was 42.9° (27.9°–66.0°) in flexion–extension (FE), 35.2° (26.8°–51.8°) in lateral bending (LB), 18.6° (6.7°–47.8°) in axial rotation (AR). In FE, average ROM was 1.9° with both 4-rod configurations versus 2.5° with 2R and 2.8° with 2R + ALIF (p < 0.05). In LB, ROM ranged between 1.2° and 1.5° without significant differences. In AR, ROM was 2.5° with both 4-rod configurations versus 2.9° with 2R (p = 0.07) and 3.1° with 2R ALIF (p = 0.01). In FE, strain decreased by 64% and 65% in principal rods at L3–L4 with 4-rod. When comparing 2-rod configurations, strain decreased by 1% in flexion and increased by 22% in extension at L3–L4 when adding an ALIF at L4–L5 and L5–S1. Conclusions Double rods and interbody cages decrease residual ROM in FE and AT. Double rods seem efficient in limiting strain in principal rods. The use of single rods with cages at the lumbosacral junction increases strain at the first adjacent level without cage.A research grant was obtained from the Société Française de Chirurgie Rachidienne (SFCR). Technical and financial support was provided by Clariance

Mortality, complication, and fusion rates of patients with odontoid fracture: the impact of age and comorbidities in 204 cases

International audiencePurposeThe French Society of Spine Surgery (SFCR) conducted a prospective epidemiologic multicenter study. The purpose was to investigate mortality, complication, and fusion rates in patients with odontoid fracture, depending on age, comorbidities, fracture type, and treatment.MethodsOut of 204 patients, 60 were ≤ 70 years and 144 were > 70 years. Demographic data, comorbidities, treatment types and complications (general medical, infectious, neurologic, and mechanical), and death were registered within the first year. Fractures were classified according to Anderson–D’Alonzo and Roy–Camille on the initial CT. A 1-year follow-up CT was available in 144 patients to evaluate fracture consolidation.ResultsType II and oblique-posterior fractures were the most frequent patterns. The treatment was conservative in 52.5% and surgical in 47.5%. The mortality rate in patients ≤ 70 was 3.3% and 16.7% in patients > 70 years (p = 0.0002). Fracture pattern and treatment type did not influence mortality. General medical complications were significantly more frequent > 70 years (p = 0.021) and after surgical treatment (p = 0.028). Neurologic complications occurred in 0.5%, postoperative infections in 2.0%, and implant-related mechanical complications in 10.3% (associated with pseudarthrosis). Fracture fusion was observed in 93.5% of patients ≤ 70 years and in 62.5% >70 years (p < 0.0001). Pseudarthrosis was present in 31.5% of oblique-posterior fractures and in 24.3% after conservative treatment.ConclusionsAge and comorbidities influenced mortality and medical complication rates most regardless of fracture type and treatment choice. Pseudarthrosis represented the main complication, which increased with age. Pseudarthrosis was most frequent in type II and oblique-posterior fractures after conservative treatment