Cargando…
Revision surgery for instrumentation failure after total en bloc spondylectomy: a retrospective case series
BACKGROUND: There have been several reports of instrumentation failure after three-column resections such as total en bloc spondylectomy (TES) for spinal tumors; however, clinical outcomes of revision surgery for instrumentation failure after TES are seldom reported. Therefore, this study assessed t...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7469324/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32878615 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-020-03622-6 |
_version_ | 1783578402669723648 |
---|---|
author | Shinmura, Kazuya Kato, Satoshi Demura, Satoru Yokogawa, Noriaki Yonezawa, Noritaka Shimizu, Takaki Oku, Norihiro Kitagawa, Ryo Handa, Makoto Annen, Ryohei Murakami, Hideki Tsuchiya, Hiroyuki |
author_facet | Shinmura, Kazuya Kato, Satoshi Demura, Satoru Yokogawa, Noriaki Yonezawa, Noritaka Shimizu, Takaki Oku, Norihiro Kitagawa, Ryo Handa, Makoto Annen, Ryohei Murakami, Hideki Tsuchiya, Hiroyuki |
author_sort | Shinmura, Kazuya |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: There have been several reports of instrumentation failure after three-column resections such as total en bloc spondylectomy (TES) for spinal tumors; however, clinical outcomes of revision surgery for instrumentation failure after TES are seldom reported. Therefore, this study assessed the clinical outcomes of revision surgery for instrumentation failure after TES. METHODS: This study employed a retrospective case series in a single center and included 61 patients with spinal tumors who underwent TES between 2010 and 2015 and were followed up for > 2 years. Instrumentation failure rate, back pain, neurological deterioration, ambulatory status, operation time, blood loss, complications, bone fusion after revision surgery, and re-instrumentation failure were assessed. Data were collected on back pain, neurological deterioration, ambulatory status, and management for patients with instrumentation failure, and we documented radiological bone fusion and re-instrumentation failure in cases followed up for > 2 years after revision surgery. RESULTS: Of the 61 patients, 26 (42.6%) experienced instrumentation failure at an average of 32 (range, 11–92) months after TES. Of these, 23 underwent revision surgery. The average operation time and intraoperative blood loss were 204 min and 97 ml, respectively. Including the six patients who were unable to walk after instrumentation failure, all patients were able to walk after revision surgery. Perioperative complications of reoperation were surgical site infection (n = 2) and delayed wound healing (n = 1). At the final follow-up, bone fusion was observed in all patients. No re-instrumentation failure was recorded. CONCLUSION: Bone fusion was achieved by revision surgery using the posterior approach alone. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7469324 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-74693242020-09-03 Revision surgery for instrumentation failure after total en bloc spondylectomy: a retrospective case series Shinmura, Kazuya Kato, Satoshi Demura, Satoru Yokogawa, Noriaki Yonezawa, Noritaka Shimizu, Takaki Oku, Norihiro Kitagawa, Ryo Handa, Makoto Annen, Ryohei Murakami, Hideki Tsuchiya, Hiroyuki BMC Musculoskelet Disord Research Article BACKGROUND: There have been several reports of instrumentation failure after three-column resections such as total en bloc spondylectomy (TES) for spinal tumors; however, clinical outcomes of revision surgery for instrumentation failure after TES are seldom reported. Therefore, this study assessed the clinical outcomes of revision surgery for instrumentation failure after TES. METHODS: This study employed a retrospective case series in a single center and included 61 patients with spinal tumors who underwent TES between 2010 and 2015 and were followed up for > 2 years. Instrumentation failure rate, back pain, neurological deterioration, ambulatory status, operation time, blood loss, complications, bone fusion after revision surgery, and re-instrumentation failure were assessed. Data were collected on back pain, neurological deterioration, ambulatory status, and management for patients with instrumentation failure, and we documented radiological bone fusion and re-instrumentation failure in cases followed up for > 2 years after revision surgery. RESULTS: Of the 61 patients, 26 (42.6%) experienced instrumentation failure at an average of 32 (range, 11–92) months after TES. Of these, 23 underwent revision surgery. The average operation time and intraoperative blood loss were 204 min and 97 ml, respectively. Including the six patients who were unable to walk after instrumentation failure, all patients were able to walk after revision surgery. Perioperative complications of reoperation were surgical site infection (n = 2) and delayed wound healing (n = 1). At the final follow-up, bone fusion was observed in all patients. No re-instrumentation failure was recorded. CONCLUSION: Bone fusion was achieved by revision surgery using the posterior approach alone. BioMed Central 2020-09-02 /pmc/articles/PMC7469324/ /pubmed/32878615 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-020-03622-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. 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 in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Shinmura, Kazuya Kato, Satoshi Demura, Satoru Yokogawa, Noriaki Yonezawa, Noritaka Shimizu, Takaki Oku, Norihiro Kitagawa, Ryo Handa, Makoto Annen, Ryohei Murakami, Hideki Tsuchiya, Hiroyuki Revision surgery for instrumentation failure after total en bloc spondylectomy: a retrospective case series |
title | Revision surgery for instrumentation failure after total en bloc spondylectomy: a retrospective case series |
title_full | Revision surgery for instrumentation failure after total en bloc spondylectomy: a retrospective case series |
title_fullStr | Revision surgery for instrumentation failure after total en bloc spondylectomy: a retrospective case series |
title_full_unstemmed | Revision surgery for instrumentation failure after total en bloc spondylectomy: a retrospective case series |
title_short | Revision surgery for instrumentation failure after total en bloc spondylectomy: a retrospective case series |
title_sort | revision surgery for instrumentation failure after total en bloc spondylectomy: a retrospective case series |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7469324/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32878615 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-020-03622-6 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT shinmurakazuya revisionsurgeryforinstrumentationfailureaftertotalenblocspondylectomyaretrospectivecaseseries AT katosatoshi revisionsurgeryforinstrumentationfailureaftertotalenblocspondylectomyaretrospectivecaseseries AT demurasatoru revisionsurgeryforinstrumentationfailureaftertotalenblocspondylectomyaretrospectivecaseseries AT yokogawanoriaki revisionsurgeryforinstrumentationfailureaftertotalenblocspondylectomyaretrospectivecaseseries AT yonezawanoritaka revisionsurgeryforinstrumentationfailureaftertotalenblocspondylectomyaretrospectivecaseseries AT shimizutakaki revisionsurgeryforinstrumentationfailureaftertotalenblocspondylectomyaretrospectivecaseseries AT okunorihiro revisionsurgeryforinstrumentationfailureaftertotalenblocspondylectomyaretrospectivecaseseries AT kitagawaryo revisionsurgeryforinstrumentationfailureaftertotalenblocspondylectomyaretrospectivecaseseries AT handamakoto revisionsurgeryforinstrumentationfailureaftertotalenblocspondylectomyaretrospectivecaseseries AT annenryohei revisionsurgeryforinstrumentationfailureaftertotalenblocspondylectomyaretrospectivecaseseries AT murakamihideki revisionsurgeryforinstrumentationfailureaftertotalenblocspondylectomyaretrospectivecaseseries AT tsuchiyahiroyuki revisionsurgeryforinstrumentationfailureaftertotalenblocspondylectomyaretrospectivecaseseries |