M Muratore1, S Allasia2, P Viglierchio1, M Abbate1, S Aleotti1, A Masse1,2, A Bistolfi3. 1. Department of Orthopaedics, Traumatology and Rehabilitation, Orthopaedic and Trauma Centre, CTO, Hospital Città della Salute e della Scienza, Via Zuretti 29, 10126, Turin, Italy. 2. School of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, University of the Studies of Turin, Via Zuretti 29, 10126, Turin, Italy. 3. Department of Orthopaedics, Traumatology and Rehabilitation, Orthopaedic and Trauma Centre, CTO, Hospital Città della Salute e della Scienza, Via Zuretti 29, 10126, Turin, Italy. abistolfi@cittadellasalute.to.it.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the outcomes of vertebral stabilisation after acute traumatic thoracolumbar fractures, correlating the outcome with patient clinical data, type and location of fracture, presence of neurological damage, timing of surgical intervention and number of instrumented levels. The results have been evaluated also through the AO classification and AOSIS score. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 101 patients with traumatic thoracolumbar injuries from T3 to L5 operated 2011-2016 by posterior or antero-posterior fixation. The demographic data, trauma dynamics, number and type of fractures, associated lesions, timing of surgery, hospital stay, AOSIS score, RKA, SF-36 and ODI scores, pre- and post-operative neurological condition (ASIA grade), possible complications and re-interventions were evaluated for each patient. RESULTS: Fractures mainly involved the region between T11 and L2. The probability of medullary involvement increases with the increase in severity of the main fracture type with no relation with the vertebral region. Type B and C fractures were common in the thoracic region and rare in the thoracolumbar junction. ODI and SF-36 scores were significantly better in patients with a lower AOSIS score, specifically in lesions classified as type A, amyelic and with no comorbidity. No difference was found in the clinical scores between thoracic, thoracolumbar and lumbar fractures, nor between male and female patients. None of the 10 patients with ASIA A lesion at presentation achieved any degree of recovery: 50% of them had a thoracic lesion. Re-intervention rate was 15%. Hospital stay was significantly higher in patients with type C fractures, and complication rate was on average 14% (7% in type A fractures, 16% in B and 25% in C). CONCLUSIONS: This study confirmed the validity of the posterior approach in the surgical treatment of thoracolumbar fractures. Outcomes and complication risks are related to fracture severity. Surgical treatment can be recommended even with an AOSIS score of two or three. The combined antero-posterior approach could be useful in cases with LSC > 8, especially in the thoracolumbar region. The degree of neurological recovery depends on fracture type, location, ASIA score and presence of comorbidities. Early intervention in myelic patients allows for a better prognosis. Level of evidence III retrospective case series.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the outcomes of vertebral stabilisation after acute traumatic thoracolumbar fractures, correlating the outcome with patient clinical data, type and location of fracture, presence of neurological damage, timing of surgical intervention and number of instrumented levels. The results have been evaluated also through the AO classification and AOSIS score. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 101 patients with traumatic thoracolumbar injuries from T3 to L5 operated 2011-2016 by posterior or antero-posterior fixation. The demographic data, trauma dynamics, number and type of fractures, associated lesions, timing of surgery, hospital stay, AOSIS score, RKA, SF-36 and ODI scores, pre- and post-operative neurological condition (ASIA grade), possible complications and re-interventions were evaluated for each patient. RESULTS:Fractures mainly involved the region between T11 and L2. The probability of medullary involvement increases with the increase in severity of the main fracture type with no relation with the vertebral region. Type B and C fractures were common in the thoracic region and rare in the thoracolumbar junction. ODI and SF-36 scores were significantly better in patients with a lower AOSIS score, specifically in lesions classified as type A, amyelic and with no comorbidity. No difference was found in the clinical scores between thoracic, thoracolumbar and lumbar fractures, nor between male and female patients. None of the 10 patients with ASIA A lesion at presentation achieved any degree of recovery: 50% of them had a thoracic lesion. Re-intervention rate was 15%. Hospital stay was significantly higher in patients with type C fractures, and complication rate was on average 14% (7% in type A fractures, 16% in B and 25% in C). CONCLUSIONS: This study confirmed the validity of the posterior approach in the surgical treatment of thoracolumbar fractures. Outcomes and complication risks are related to fracture severity. Surgical treatment can be recommended even with an AOSIS score of two or three. The combined antero-posterior approach could be useful in cases with LSC > 8, especially in the thoracolumbar region. The degree of neurological recovery depends on fracture type, location, ASIA score and presence of comorbidities. Early intervention in myelic patients allows for a better prognosis. Level of evidence III retrospective case series.