Cargando…

Evaluation of spinous process wiring techniques for accidental canal penetration

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Accidental canal penetration with attendant complications constitutes one of the reasons for abandoning the use of wires for posterior spinal fusion techniques. However, there is dearth of information on this risk when the wire is introduced through the base of spinous proc...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Adeolu, Augustine A, Azeez, Abiodun L
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3724293/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23914091
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0976-3147.112748
_version_ 1782476673793392640
author Adeolu, Augustine A
Azeez, Abiodun L
author_facet Adeolu, Augustine A
Azeez, Abiodun L
author_sort Adeolu, Augustine A
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Accidental canal penetration with attendant complications constitutes one of the reasons for abandoning the use of wires for posterior spinal fusion techniques. However, there is dearth of information on this risk when the wire is introduced through the base of spinous process as against sublaminar passage. This study was designed to evaluate hardware-related postoperative complications, especially canal penetration, in our patients who had spinal process wiring in two types of posterior wiring techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients who had either of two spinous process wiring techniques formed the population for the study. The clinical records were reviewed and the following data were extracted: Age, sex, diagnosis, operation (fusion type), preoperative neurological status, postoperative neurologic deterioration, other postoperative complication and radiologic evidence of canal encroachment. RESULTS: One hundred and seventy four spinous processes were instrumented in 42 patients. The age of the patients ranged from 11 to 78 years while male to female ratio was 2.5:1. Majority of the spinal wiring were for trauma (29 patients; 69.0) while the remaining were tumor (6; 14.3%), degenerative diseases (4; 9.5%) and infections (3; 7.1%). The Rogers technique was performed in 16 (38.1%) patients while 26 (61.9%) underwent Adeolu et al. technique. One patient (2.3%) had neurologic deterioration while 5 patients (11.1%) had varying type of complications from wound infection to fracture of spinous processes. There was no patient with radiological or clinical evidence of canal compromise. CONCLUSION: Spinous process wiring techniques for posterior spinal stabilization appears to be safe as demonstrated in this study.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3724293
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-37242932013-08-02 Evaluation of spinous process wiring techniques for accidental canal penetration Adeolu, Augustine A Azeez, Abiodun L J Neurosci Rural Pract Original Article BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Accidental canal penetration with attendant complications constitutes one of the reasons for abandoning the use of wires for posterior spinal fusion techniques. However, there is dearth of information on this risk when the wire is introduced through the base of spinous process as against sublaminar passage. This study was designed to evaluate hardware-related postoperative complications, especially canal penetration, in our patients who had spinal process wiring in two types of posterior wiring techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients who had either of two spinous process wiring techniques formed the population for the study. The clinical records were reviewed and the following data were extracted: Age, sex, diagnosis, operation (fusion type), preoperative neurological status, postoperative neurologic deterioration, other postoperative complication and radiologic evidence of canal encroachment. RESULTS: One hundred and seventy four spinous processes were instrumented in 42 patients. The age of the patients ranged from 11 to 78 years while male to female ratio was 2.5:1. Majority of the spinal wiring were for trauma (29 patients; 69.0) while the remaining were tumor (6; 14.3%), degenerative diseases (4; 9.5%) and infections (3; 7.1%). The Rogers technique was performed in 16 (38.1%) patients while 26 (61.9%) underwent Adeolu et al. technique. One patient (2.3%) had neurologic deterioration while 5 patients (11.1%) had varying type of complications from wound infection to fracture of spinous processes. There was no patient with radiological or clinical evidence of canal compromise. CONCLUSION: Spinous process wiring techniques for posterior spinal stabilization appears to be safe as demonstrated in this study. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2013 /pmc/articles/PMC3724293/ /pubmed/23914091 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0976-3147.112748 Text en Copyright: © Journal of Neurosciences in Rural Practice http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Adeolu, Augustine A
Azeez, Abiodun L
Evaluation of spinous process wiring techniques for accidental canal penetration
title Evaluation of spinous process wiring techniques for accidental canal penetration
title_full Evaluation of spinous process wiring techniques for accidental canal penetration
title_fullStr Evaluation of spinous process wiring techniques for accidental canal penetration
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of spinous process wiring techniques for accidental canal penetration
title_short Evaluation of spinous process wiring techniques for accidental canal penetration
title_sort evaluation of spinous process wiring techniques for accidental canal penetration
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3724293/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23914091
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0976-3147.112748
work_keys_str_mv AT adeoluaugustinea evaluationofspinousprocesswiringtechniquesforaccidentalcanalpenetration
AT azeezabiodunl evaluationofspinousprocesswiringtechniquesforaccidentalcanalpenetration