Purpose

We report our surgical management of a series of primary and metastatic tumours of the lumbosacral junction, highlighting different methods of fixation, outcome and complications.

Background

Frozen Shoulder is a common condition which causes significant morbidity in people of working age. The 2 most popular forms of surgical treatment for this condition are Manipulation under Anaesthesia (MUA) or MUA plus Arthroscopic Capsular Release (ACR). Both treatment modalities are known to give good results, but no-one has compared the two to see which is better.

Purpose: To identify patients in whom anterior scoliosis correction was not possible and to determine pre-operative factors that may predict such an outcome.

Methods: From 1999–2005, 257 patients were listed for anterior correction with the Kaneda Anterior Spine System (KASS). Of these 246 were completed successfully. However in 11 cases it was not possible to complete the procedure.

We performed a retrospective review of case notes and X-rays. A control group of 22 patients, in whom anterior surgery was completed, matched to age, sex and type of curve, was used.

Results: Two reasons for abandoning anterior instrumentation were identified; loss of cord signal (7) and failure to achieve adequate correction after anterior release and reduction (4).

Of the seven patients with lost signal three were syndromic and four were associated with syrinx. In all seven, loss of signal occurred on clamping of segmental vessels. All seven had no residual neurological deficit post-operatively and had uncomplicated posterior correction the following week.

All four patients in whom inadequate correction was achieved after anterior release and repositioning had idiopathic curves. Of these two were thoracic and two were thoracolumbar. Mean pre-operative Cobb angle was 67 (range 59–85) compared to a mean of 56 (range 42–68) in the control group. Mean pre-operative stiffness index was 91% (range 85%–100%) compared to a mean stiffness index of 65% (range 53–80) in the control population.

Conclusion: Whilst a successful outcome is achieved in a majority of KASS instrumentations we have identified two reasons why anterior surgery has to be abandoned. Whilst one often cannot pre-operatively anticipate intra-operative loss of cord signal, we found that in cases with an underlying syrinx there is a particular risk of this occurrence. Our experience has shown particularly stiff curves (Stiffness index ≥ 85%) may not be suitable for stand-alone anterior surgery.

Purpose: We report our surgical management of a series of primary and metastatic tumours of the lumbosacral junction, highlighting different methods of fixation, outcome and complications.

Method: Seven patients with primary and four with secondary tumours involving the lumbosacral junction underwent surgery. After tumour resection, iliolumbar fixation was performed in all but one case, using Galveston rods (4) or iliac screws (6). All constructs were attached proximally with pedicle screws. Cross links were used in all instrumented cases and autologous and allogenic bone graft applied.

Results: There were no perioperative deaths. Mean operating time was 7.3 hours (range 3–18) and there was extensive blood loss (mean transfusion requirement 7.5 units, range 0–20). We estimate a transfusion requirement of approximately one unit per hour operating time. However, we noted no complications attributable to either blood loss or transfusions.

Ambulation improved in 5, was unchanged in 5 and deteriorated in one. Neurological status deteriorated in 4 and remained static in the others. However in all but one case the neurological deficit was defined by the nature of proposed surgery. Mean survival from surgery for patients with metastatic disease was 9.5 months (3–18). At mean follow up of 10 months (1–19 months), all patients with primary tumours were still alive without evidence tumour recurrence.

Extralesional excision, and therefore potentially curative surgery, was achieved in 4 cases where this was the primary goal of surgery (osteosarcoma, osteoblastoma, chordoma, embryonic rhabdomyosarcoma). There were no cases of metalwork failure. One patient has undergone revision surgery for pseudathrosis.

Conclusion: Sacral resection and iliolumbar reconstruction is a feasible treatment option in selected patients, offering potential cure. The fixation methods used by the authors restored lumbosacral stability, sufficient for pain relief and preserving ambulation and usually the predicted level of neurological function.

Purpose: To study the results of treatment of symptomatic non-union with endoprosthesis at the Royal Orthopaedic Hospital

Methods: Between 1987 & 2005, 17patients were treated with massive endoprosthesis for non-union. We performed a retrospective review of these case notes

Results: Mean age at diagnosis was 63years (range 36–86). Location of non-union was distal femur in 9, proximal femur in 4, proximal humerus in 2, proximal tibia in 1, distal humerus in 1. The majority of the patients had received prior multiple operations before endoprosthetic surgery.

Four patients had obvious infection confirmed by histology and/or microbiology prior to surgery. Endoprosthetic Reconstruction was performed as a 1 stage procedure in 13 and as a 2 stage in 4.

Complications occurred in 5 patients. These included recurrence of infection in 1, persistent pain in 1, aseptic loosening in 1, periprosthetic fracture in 1 and a non ST myocardial infarction in 1. At the last follow-up, (mean 5years, range 1–18years) majority of patients achieved good range of motion and good mobility.

Conclusion: We conclude that endoprosthetic replacement is a reasonable option for treatment of end-stage non-union in carefully selected patients. Adequate mobility and function can be achieved in majority of patients following such treatment