Cargando…

Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery versus Open Posterior Instrumentation Surgery for Unstable Thoracolumbar Burst Fracture

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study. PURPOSE: To compare the clinical and radiological results of minimally invasive spine surgery (MISS) and open posterior instrumentation surgery for the treatment of unstable burst fractures. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: MISS has exhibited postoperative outcomes similar...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hong, Sung-Ha, Suh, Seung-Pyo, Yeom, Jiung, Kim, Joo-Young, Lee, Seung Gi, Han, Jeong-Woon
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Korean Society of Spine Surgery 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8696052/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34000798
http://dx.doi.org/10.31616/asj.2020.0572
_version_ 1784619719848886272
author Hong, Sung-Ha
Suh, Seung-Pyo
Yeom, Jiung
Kim, Joo-Young
Lee, Seung Gi
Han, Jeong-Woon
author_facet Hong, Sung-Ha
Suh, Seung-Pyo
Yeom, Jiung
Kim, Joo-Young
Lee, Seung Gi
Han, Jeong-Woon
author_sort Hong, Sung-Ha
collection PubMed
description STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study. PURPOSE: To compare the clinical and radiological results of minimally invasive spine surgery (MISS) and open posterior instrumentation surgery for the treatment of unstable burst fractures. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: MISS has exhibited postoperative outcomes similar to those obtained using open posterior instrumentation in various spine diseases. There remains no consensus regarding the use of MISS in the treatment of unstable burst fracture. METHODS: We enrolled 40 patients who underwent either MISS (M group, 20 patients) or open posterior instrumentation surgery (O group, 20 patients) for the treatment of traumatic unstable burst fractures. Clinical outcomes were evaluated based on postoperative back pain, operation time, blood loss, hospital stay duration, and perioperative complications. For radiologic evaluation, preoperative magnetic resonance imaging and plain radiography were performed before and after the surgery to evaluate the changes in the kyphotic angle and fracture union. RESULTS: The change in the kyphotic angle was −8.2°±5.8° in the M group and −8.0°±7.8° in the O group. No significant difference was noted in terms of the change in the kyphotic angle (p=0.94, t-test) after 12 months of surgery. The Visual Analog Scale score was 1.5±0.7 points in the M group, while it was 5.2±1.4 points in the O group. In the M group, back pain has significantly decreased (p<0.01, t-test). The estimated blood loss was 195.5 mL in the M group and 1,077.5 mL in the O group; the operation time was significantly decreased in the O group from 290.7 to 120.7 minutes in the M group (p<0.05, t-test) (p=0.36, t-test). The average duration of hospital stay was 36.0 days in the M group and 41.9 days in the O group (p=0.36, t-test). CONCLUSIONS: For the treatment of unstable burst fractures, MISS showed significant differences in terms of postoperative back pain, operation time, and blood loss as compared to open posterior instrumentation surgery.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8696052
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Korean Society of Spine Surgery
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-86960522022-01-05 Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery versus Open Posterior Instrumentation Surgery for Unstable Thoracolumbar Burst Fracture Hong, Sung-Ha Suh, Seung-Pyo Yeom, Jiung Kim, Joo-Young Lee, Seung Gi Han, Jeong-Woon Asian Spine J Clinical Study STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study. PURPOSE: To compare the clinical and radiological results of minimally invasive spine surgery (MISS) and open posterior instrumentation surgery for the treatment of unstable burst fractures. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: MISS has exhibited postoperative outcomes similar to those obtained using open posterior instrumentation in various spine diseases. There remains no consensus regarding the use of MISS in the treatment of unstable burst fracture. METHODS: We enrolled 40 patients who underwent either MISS (M group, 20 patients) or open posterior instrumentation surgery (O group, 20 patients) for the treatment of traumatic unstable burst fractures. Clinical outcomes were evaluated based on postoperative back pain, operation time, blood loss, hospital stay duration, and perioperative complications. For radiologic evaluation, preoperative magnetic resonance imaging and plain radiography were performed before and after the surgery to evaluate the changes in the kyphotic angle and fracture union. RESULTS: The change in the kyphotic angle was −8.2°±5.8° in the M group and −8.0°±7.8° in the O group. No significant difference was noted in terms of the change in the kyphotic angle (p=0.94, t-test) after 12 months of surgery. The Visual Analog Scale score was 1.5±0.7 points in the M group, while it was 5.2±1.4 points in the O group. In the M group, back pain has significantly decreased (p<0.01, t-test). The estimated blood loss was 195.5 mL in the M group and 1,077.5 mL in the O group; the operation time was significantly decreased in the O group from 290.7 to 120.7 minutes in the M group (p<0.05, t-test) (p=0.36, t-test). The average duration of hospital stay was 36.0 days in the M group and 41.9 days in the O group (p=0.36, t-test). CONCLUSIONS: For the treatment of unstable burst fractures, MISS showed significant differences in terms of postoperative back pain, operation time, and blood loss as compared to open posterior instrumentation surgery. Korean Society of Spine Surgery 2021-12 2021-05-20 /pmc/articles/PMC8696052/ /pubmed/34000798 http://dx.doi.org/10.31616/asj.2020.0572 Text en Copyright © 2021 by Korean Society of Spine Surgery https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) ) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Clinical Study
Hong, Sung-Ha
Suh, Seung-Pyo
Yeom, Jiung
Kim, Joo-Young
Lee, Seung Gi
Han, Jeong-Woon
Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery versus Open Posterior Instrumentation Surgery for Unstable Thoracolumbar Burst Fracture
title Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery versus Open Posterior Instrumentation Surgery for Unstable Thoracolumbar Burst Fracture
title_full Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery versus Open Posterior Instrumentation Surgery for Unstable Thoracolumbar Burst Fracture
title_fullStr Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery versus Open Posterior Instrumentation Surgery for Unstable Thoracolumbar Burst Fracture
title_full_unstemmed Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery versus Open Posterior Instrumentation Surgery for Unstable Thoracolumbar Burst Fracture
title_short Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery versus Open Posterior Instrumentation Surgery for Unstable Thoracolumbar Burst Fracture
title_sort minimally invasive spine surgery versus open posterior instrumentation surgery for unstable thoracolumbar burst fracture
topic Clinical Study
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8696052/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34000798
http://dx.doi.org/10.31616/asj.2020.0572
work_keys_str_mv AT hongsungha minimallyinvasivespinesurgeryversusopenposteriorinstrumentationsurgeryforunstablethoracolumbarburstfracture
AT suhseungpyo minimallyinvasivespinesurgeryversusopenposteriorinstrumentationsurgeryforunstablethoracolumbarburstfracture
AT yeomjiung minimallyinvasivespinesurgeryversusopenposteriorinstrumentationsurgeryforunstablethoracolumbarburstfracture
AT kimjooyoung minimallyinvasivespinesurgeryversusopenposteriorinstrumentationsurgeryforunstablethoracolumbarburstfracture
AT leeseunggi minimallyinvasivespinesurgeryversusopenposteriorinstrumentationsurgeryforunstablethoracolumbarburstfracture
AT hanjeongwoon minimallyinvasivespinesurgeryversusopenposteriorinstrumentationsurgeryforunstablethoracolumbarburstfracture