A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Sacral fracture after instrumented lumbosacral fusion: analysis of risk factors from spinopelvic parameters. | LitMetric

Study Design: Retrospective comparative study.

Objective: To examine the incidence and characteristics of key spinopelvic parameters that are correlated with sacral fracture development after lumbosacral fusion.

Summary Of Background Data: Sacral fracture is a possible complication of instrumented lumbosacral fusion and this has recently been documented in the literature. Preoperative awareness of risk factors concerning spinopelvic parameters and sacral fracture may aid in surgical planning to prevent its occurrence.

Methods: All patients who underwent instrumented lumbosacral fusion from L2 or above, between 2010 and 2011 at Gakkentoshi Hospital, were included.

Results: A total of 116 patients (47 men and 69 women) were evaluated in this study. Average age at surgery was 71 years, and the average follow-up period was 19 months. The average number of fixed segments was 5, and the average time interval between index surgery and sacral fracture development was 42 days. Notably, sacral fractures were identified in 5 patients (4.3%), all of whom were women. We, therefore, compared the 2 groups of female patients (fracture group, n = 5 vs. nonfracture group, n = 64). The fracture group had a substantially higher mean pelvic incidence (PI) than the nonfracture group (72° ± 8° vs. 51° ± 12°, respectively, P < 0.01). The fracture group also had a larger postoperative lumbar lordosis (LL)-PI mismatch than the nonfracture group (-26° ± 7° vs. -7° ± 18°, respectively, P < 0.01).

Conclusion: The current review of our patients informs appropriate preoperative planning in cases involving lumbosacral fusion for postmenopausal women with a high PI. Surgeons should plan to achieve large increases in LL to restore not only spinopelvic harmony but also to avoid postoperative sacral fracture. For such patients, because it is difficult to consistently achieve a sufficiently large LL, we recommend prophylactic iliosacral fixation to protect the sacrum.

Level Of Evidence: 4.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e31827dc000DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

sacral fracture
24
lumbosacral fusion
16
instrumented lumbosacral
12
spinopelvic parameters
12
fracture group
12
nonfracture group
12
risk factors
8
fracture
8
fracture development
8
achieve large
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!