Literature DB >> 28598294

Open versus percutaneous instrumentation in thoracolumbar fractures: magnetic resonance imaging comparison of paravertebral muscles after implant removal.

Yves Ntilikina1, David Bahlau1, Julien Garnon1, Sébastien Schuller1, Axel Walter1, Mickaël Schaeffer1, Jean-Paul Steib1, Yann Philippe Charles1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE Percutaneous instrumentation in thoracolumbar fractures is intended to decrease paravertebral muscle damage by avoiding dissection. The aim of this study was to compare muscles at instrumented levels in patients who were treated by open or percutaneous surgery. METHODS Twenty-seven patients underwent open instrumentation, and 65 were treated percutaneously. A standardized MRI protocol using axial T1-weighted sequences was performed at a minimum 1-year follow-up after implant removal. Two independent observers measured cross-sectional areas (CSAs, in cm2) and region of interest (ROI) signal intensity (in pixels) of paravertebral muscles by using OsiriX at the fracture level, and at cranial and caudal instrumented pedicle levels. An interobserver comparison was made using the Bland-Altman method. Reference ROI muscle was assessed in the psoas and ROI fat subcutaneously. The ratio ROI-CSA/ROI-fat was compared for patients treated with open versus percutaneous procedures by using a linear mixed model. A linear regression analyzed additional factors: age, sex, body mass index (BMI), Pfirrmann grade of adjacent discs, and duration of instrumentation in situ. RESULTS The interobserver agreement was good for all CSAs. The average CSA for the entire spine was 15.7 cm2 in the open surgery group and 18.5 cm2 in the percutaneous group (p = 0.0234). The average ROI-fat and ROI-muscle signal intensities were comparable: 497.1 versus 483.9 pixels for ROI-fat and 120.4 versus 111.7 pixels for ROI-muscle in open versus percutaneous groups. The ROI-CSA varied between 154 and 226 for open, and between 154 and 195 for percutaneous procedures, depending on instrumented levels. A significant difference of the ROI-CSA/ROI-fat ratio (0.4 vs 0.3) was present at fracture levels T12-L1 (p = 0.0329) and at adjacent cranial (p = 0.0139) and caudal (p = 0.0100) instrumented levels. Differences were not significant at thoracic levels. When adjusting based on age, BMI, and Pfirrmann grade, a significant difference between open and percutaneous procedures regarding the ROI-CSA/ROI-fat ratio was present in the lumbar spine (p < 0.01). Sex and duration of instrumentation had no significant influence. CONCLUSIONS Percutaneous instrumentation decreased muscle atrophy compared with open surgery. The MRI signal differences for T-12 and L-1 fractures indicated less fat infiltration within CSAs in patients who received percutaneous treatment. Differences were not evidenced at thoracic levels, where CSAs were smaller. Fat infiltration was not significantly different at lumbar levels with either procedure in elderly patients with associated discopathy and higher BMI. In younger patients, there was less fat infiltration of lumbar paravertebral muscles with percutaneous procedures.

Entities:  

Keywords:  BMI = body mass index; CSA = cross-sectional area; MIS = minimally invasive surgery; MRI; ROI = region of interest; fat infiltration; minimally invasive surgery; paravertebral muscle atrophy; percutaneous instrumentation; thoracolumbar fracture; trauma

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28598294     DOI: 10.3171/2017.1.SPINE16886

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine        ISSN: 1547-5646


  9 in total

Review 1.  Surgical Site Infection Management following Spinal Instrumentation Surgery: Implant Removal vs. Implant Retention: an Updated Systematical Review.

Authors:  Andhika Yudistira; Syaifullah Asmiragani; Abdul Waris Imran; Muhammad Alwy Sugiarto
Journal:  Acta Inform Med       Date:  2022-06

2.  Signal Intensity of Lumbar Disc Herniations: Correlation With Age of Herniation for Extrusion, Protrusion, and Sequestration.

Authors:  Markus Rafael Konieczny; Jeremia Reinhardt; Max Prost; Christoph Schleich; Rüdiger Krauspe
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2020-02-29

Review 3.  Muscular changes after minimally invasive versus open spinal stabilization of thoracolumbar fractures: A literature review.

Authors:  Miguel Pishnamaz; Ulrike Schemmann; Christian Herren; Klemens Horst; Philipp Lichte; Frank Hildebrand; Hans-Christoph Pape; Philipp Kobbe
Journal:  J Musculoskelet Neuronal Interact       Date:  2018-03-01       Impact factor: 2.041

4.  Treatment of Fractures of the Thoracolumbar Spine: Recommendations of the Spine Section of the German Society for Orthopaedics and Trauma (DGOU).

Authors:  Akhil P Verheyden; Ulrich J Spiegl; Helmut Ekkerlein; Erol Gercek; Stefan Hauck; Christoph Josten; Frank Kandziora; Sebastian Katscher; Philipp Kobbe; Christian Knop; Wolfgang Lehmann; Rainer H Meffert; Christian W Müller; Axel Partenheimer; Christian Schinkel; Philipp Schleicher; Matti Scholz; Christoph Ulrich; Alexander Hoelzl
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2018-09-07

5.  Open versus minimally invasive percutaneous surgery for surgical treatment of thoracolumbar spine fractures- a multicenter randomized controlled trial: study protocol.

Authors:  Helton L A Defino; Herton R T Costa; Altacílio A Nunes; Marcello Nogueira Barbosa; Valéria Romero
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2019-08-31       Impact factor: 2.362

6.  Percutaneous versus open posterior stabilization in AOSpine type A3 thoracolumbar fractures.

Authors:  Christoph J Erichsen; Christoph-Eckhard Heyde; Christoph Josten; Oliver Gonschorek; Stephanie Panzer; Christian von Rüden; Ulrich J Spiegl
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2020-02-05       Impact factor: 2.362

7.  Patient Satisfaction with Implant Removal after Stabilization Using Percutaneous Pedicle Screws for Traumatic Thoracolumbar Fracture.

Authors:  Takeshi Sasagawa; Yasutaka Takagi; Hiroyuki Hayashi; Kazuhiro Nanpo
Journal:  Asian J Neurosurg       Date:  2021-12-18

8.  Comparisons of Lumbar Muscle Performance Between Minimally-Invasive and Open Lumbar Fusion Surgery at 1-Year Follow-Up.

Authors:  Meng-Ling Lu; Chih-Hsiu Cheng; Wen-Chien Chen; Chen-Ju Fu; Chi-Chien Niu
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2020-12-17

9.  What Is the Comparison in Robot Time per Screw, Radiation Exposure, Robot Abandonment, Screw Accuracy, and Clinical Outcomes Between Percutaneous and Open Robot-Assisted Short Lumbar Fusion?: A Multicenter, Propensity-Matched Analysis of 310 Patients.

Authors:  Nathan J Lee; Ian A Buchanan; Scott L Zuckermann; Venkat Boddapati; Justin Mathew; Matthew Geiselmann; Paul J Park; Eric Leung; Avery L Buchholz; Asham Khan; Jeffrey Mullin; John Pollina; Ehsan Jazini; Colin Haines; Thomas C Schuler; Christopher R Good; Joseph M Lombardi; Ronald A Lehman
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2022-01-01       Impact factor: 3.468

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.