Cargando…

Percutaneous versus open posterior stabilization in AOSpine type A3 thoracolumbar fractures

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this retrospective cohort study was to compare treatment strategies of two level-one trauma centers regarding clinical and radiological outcomes focusing on non-osteoporotic AOSpine type A3 fractures of the thoracolumbar spine at levels T11 to L2. METHODS: Eighty-seven pat...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Erichsen, Christoph J., Heyde, Christoph-Eckhard, Josten, Christoph, Gonschorek, Oliver, Panzer, Stephanie, von Rüden, Christian, Spiegl, Ulrich J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7003397/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32024494
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-020-3099-6
_version_ 1783494526838505472
author Erichsen, Christoph J.
Heyde, Christoph-Eckhard
Josten, Christoph
Gonschorek, Oliver
Panzer, Stephanie
von Rüden, Christian
Spiegl, Ulrich J.
author_facet Erichsen, Christoph J.
Heyde, Christoph-Eckhard
Josten, Christoph
Gonschorek, Oliver
Panzer, Stephanie
von Rüden, Christian
Spiegl, Ulrich J.
author_sort Erichsen, Christoph J.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The purpose of this retrospective cohort study was to compare treatment strategies of two level-one trauma centers regarding clinical and radiological outcomes focusing on non-osteoporotic AOSpine type A3 fractures of the thoracolumbar spine at levels T11 to L2. METHODS: Eighty-seven patients between 18 and 65 years of age that were treated operatively in either of two trauma centers were included. One treatment strategy includes open posterior stabilization whereas the other uses percutaneous posterior stabilization. Both included additional anterior fusion if necessary. Demographic data, McCormack classification, duration of surgery, hospital stay and further parameters were assessed. Owestry Disability Index (ODI), Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and SF-36 were measured for functional outcome. Bisegmental kyphosis angle, reduction loss and sagittal alignment parameters were assessed for radiological outcome. Follow up was at least 24 months. RESULTS: There was no significant difference regarding our primary functional outcome parameter (ODI) between both groups. Regarding radiological outcome kyphosis angle at time of follow up did not show a significant difference. Reduction loss at time of follow up was moderate in both groups with a significantly lower rate in the percutaneously stabilized group. Surgery time was significantly shorter for posterior stabilization and anterior fusion in the percutaneous group. Time of hospital stay was equal for posterior stabilization but shorter for anterior fusion in the open stabilized group. CONCLUSION: Both treatment strategies are safe and effective showing only minor loss of reduction. Clinical relevant differences in functional and radiographic outcome between the two surgical groups could not be demonstrated. TRIAL REGISTRATION: It was conducted according to ICMJE guidelines and has been retrospectively registered with the German Clinical Trials Registry (identification number: DRKS00015693, 07.11.2018).
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7003397
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70033972020-02-10 Percutaneous versus open posterior stabilization in AOSpine type A3 thoracolumbar fractures Erichsen, Christoph J. Heyde, Christoph-Eckhard Josten, Christoph Gonschorek, Oliver Panzer, Stephanie von Rüden, Christian Spiegl, Ulrich J. BMC Musculoskelet Disord Research Article BACKGROUND: The purpose of this retrospective cohort study was to compare treatment strategies of two level-one trauma centers regarding clinical and radiological outcomes focusing on non-osteoporotic AOSpine type A3 fractures of the thoracolumbar spine at levels T11 to L2. METHODS: Eighty-seven patients between 18 and 65 years of age that were treated operatively in either of two trauma centers were included. One treatment strategy includes open posterior stabilization whereas the other uses percutaneous posterior stabilization. Both included additional anterior fusion if necessary. Demographic data, McCormack classification, duration of surgery, hospital stay and further parameters were assessed. Owestry Disability Index (ODI), Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and SF-36 were measured for functional outcome. Bisegmental kyphosis angle, reduction loss and sagittal alignment parameters were assessed for radiological outcome. Follow up was at least 24 months. RESULTS: There was no significant difference regarding our primary functional outcome parameter (ODI) between both groups. Regarding radiological outcome kyphosis angle at time of follow up did not show a significant difference. Reduction loss at time of follow up was moderate in both groups with a significantly lower rate in the percutaneously stabilized group. Surgery time was significantly shorter for posterior stabilization and anterior fusion in the percutaneous group. Time of hospital stay was equal for posterior stabilization but shorter for anterior fusion in the open stabilized group. CONCLUSION: Both treatment strategies are safe and effective showing only minor loss of reduction. Clinical relevant differences in functional and radiographic outcome between the two surgical groups could not be demonstrated. TRIAL REGISTRATION: It was conducted according to ICMJE guidelines and has been retrospectively registered with the German Clinical Trials Registry (identification number: DRKS00015693, 07.11.2018). BioMed Central 2020-02-05 /pmc/articles/PMC7003397/ /pubmed/32024494 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-020-3099-6 Text en © The Author(s). 2020 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Erichsen, Christoph J.
Heyde, Christoph-Eckhard
Josten, Christoph
Gonschorek, Oliver
Panzer, Stephanie
von Rüden, Christian
Spiegl, Ulrich J.
Percutaneous versus open posterior stabilization in AOSpine type A3 thoracolumbar fractures
title Percutaneous versus open posterior stabilization in AOSpine type A3 thoracolumbar fractures
title_full Percutaneous versus open posterior stabilization in AOSpine type A3 thoracolumbar fractures
title_fullStr Percutaneous versus open posterior stabilization in AOSpine type A3 thoracolumbar fractures
title_full_unstemmed Percutaneous versus open posterior stabilization in AOSpine type A3 thoracolumbar fractures
title_short Percutaneous versus open posterior stabilization in AOSpine type A3 thoracolumbar fractures
title_sort percutaneous versus open posterior stabilization in aospine type a3 thoracolumbar fractures
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7003397/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32024494
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-020-3099-6
work_keys_str_mv AT erichsenchristophj percutaneousversusopenposteriorstabilizationinaospinetypea3thoracolumbarfractures
AT heydechristopheckhard percutaneousversusopenposteriorstabilizationinaospinetypea3thoracolumbarfractures
AT jostenchristoph percutaneousversusopenposteriorstabilizationinaospinetypea3thoracolumbarfractures
AT gonschorekoliver percutaneousversusopenposteriorstabilizationinaospinetypea3thoracolumbarfractures
AT panzerstephanie percutaneousversusopenposteriorstabilizationinaospinetypea3thoracolumbarfractures
AT vonrudenchristian percutaneousversusopenposteriorstabilizationinaospinetypea3thoracolumbarfractures
AT spieglulrichj percutaneousversusopenposteriorstabilizationinaospinetypea3thoracolumbarfractures