Clinical spine surgery · 2022
Iliac Screw Fixation Revisited: Improved Clinical and Radiologic Outcomes Using a Modified Iliac Screw Fixation Technique.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
von Glinski Alexander, Elia Christopher J, Wiginton James G, Ansari Darius, Pierre Clifford, Ishak Basem, Yilmaz Emre, Blecher Ronen, Dettori Joseph R, Hayman Erik, Schildhauer Thomas A, Oskouian Rod J, Chapman Jens R
Аннотация
STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective study.
OBJECTIVE: To describe the modified iliac screw (mILS) technique and compare it to other spinopelvic fixation techniques in terms of wound healing complications, hardware prominence, and failure.
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The traditional entry point of an iliac screw often causes postoperative gluteal pain from the prominent screw head. The use of an offset connector also adds a point of weakness to the construct. By choosing a different screw entry point offset connectors can be avoided, and the screw head itself is less prominent, thereby reducing postoperative discomfort.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed of adult patients undergoing lumbopelvic fixation (LPF) between January 2014 and June 2019. Patients were grouped into 1 of 3 groups based on the technique of pelvic fixation: S2 alar-iliac (S2AI) screw, traditional iliac screw (tILS), and mILS. The primary outcome parameter was the minimal distance from screw head to skin. Secondary outcome parameters were instrumentation loosening/failure, adjacent level fractures, pseudoarthrosis, and medial or lateral iliac screw perforation.
RESULTS: A total of 190 patients undergoing LPF were included in the following 3 groups: mILS group (n=113), tILS group (n=40), and S2AI group (n=37). The mean minimal distance from screw head to skin in the mILS group was 31.3 mm compared with 23.7 mm in the tILS group (P<0.00199). No statistically significant differences were found when comparing the 3 groups with respect to complications. The mILS group did not show any cases of prominent instrumentation and had the lowest rate of instrumentation failure.
CONCLUSIONS: The mILS technique is an acceptable alternative for LPF, offering the benefits of iliac screw fixation while avoiding offset connectors and screw prominence complications associated with tILS.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.
OBJECTIVE: To describe the modified iliac screw (mILS) technique and compare it to other spinopelvic fixation techniques in terms of wound healing complications, hardware prominence, and failure.
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The traditional entry point of an iliac screw often causes postoperative gluteal pain from the prominent screw head. The use of an offset connector also adds a point of weakness to the construct. By choosing a different screw entry point offset connectors can be avoided, and the screw head itself is less prominent, thereby reducing postoperative discomfort.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed of adult patients undergoing lumbopelvic fixation (LPF) between January 2014 and June 2019. Patients were grouped into 1 of 3 groups based on the technique of pelvic fixation: S2 alar-iliac (S2AI) screw, traditional iliac screw (tILS), and mILS. The primary outcome parameter was the minimal distance from screw head to skin. Secondary outcome parameters were instrumentation loosening/failure, adjacent level fractures, pseudoarthrosis, and medial or lateral iliac screw perforation.
RESULTS: A total of 190 patients undergoing LPF were included in the following 3 groups: mILS group (n=113), tILS group (n=40), and S2AI group (n=37). The mean minimal distance from screw head to skin in the mILS group was 31.3 mm compared with 23.7 mm in the tILS group (P<0.00199). No statistically significant differences were found when comparing the 3 groups with respect to complications. The mILS group did not show any cases of prominent instrumentation and had the lowest rate of instrumentation failure.
CONCLUSIONS: The mILS technique is an acceptable alternative for LPF, offering the benefits of iliac screw fixation while avoiding offset connectors and screw prominence complications associated with tILS.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.