Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Results per page:
Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 94-B, Issue SUPP_X | Pages 121 - 121
1 Apr 2012
Jehan S Thambiraj S Sundaram R Boszczyk B
Full Access

Literature review about the current management strategies for U-shape sacral fractures. A thorough literature search was carried out to find out the current concepts in the management of U-shaped sacral fractures. Meta-analysis of 30 cases of U-Shaped sacral fractures. Radiological assessment for bone healing, and clinical examination for neurological recovery. 7 papers were published in the English literature between 2001 and 2009 about the management of U-shaped sacral fractures. In total 30 cases were included. The most common mechanism of injury was fall or jump from height (63%), followed by road traffic accidents and industrial injuries. Pre-operative neurological deficit was noted in 73% of patients. The average follow up time ranged from 2-12 months. 18 (60%) of patients were treated with sacroiliac screws. In this group pre-operative neurological deficit was found in 12(66%) patients. All of these patients had satisfactory radiological healing at follow up but 5(27%) patients had residual neurological deficit. No immediate complication was reported in this group. Incomplete sacroiliac screw disengagement was reported in one patient without fixation failure. Other procedures performed were lumbopelvic fixation, triangular osteosynthesis and transsacral plating. The most common cause of U-shaped sacral fractures is a fall or jump from height. There is a high association of neurological damage with U-shaped sacral fractures. From the current available evidence sacroiliac screw fixation is the most commonly performed procedure, it is however not possible to deduce which procedure is better in terms of neurological recovery


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 94-B, Issue SUPP_XXVI | Pages 64 - 64
1 Jun 2012
König MA Balamurali G Ebrahimi FV Grevitt MP Mehdian H Boszczyk BM
Full Access

Introduction. Recently published results suggest insertion of shorter screws in L5/S1 stand-alone anterior interbody fusion, fearing S1 nerve root violation. However, insertion of shorter screws led to screw fixation failure and new onset of S1 body fractures. Material and Methods. Retrospective review of patients with L5/S1 stand-alone anterior interbody fusion, focussing on screw length, radiological outcomes (especially metal work failure, screw fixation and S1 body fractures) and new onset of S1 nerve root irritation. Results. 38 patients were included (mean age 46.2±13.3 years, 21 females, 17 males). Fusion of the L5/S1 segment was performed in between 2003-2010; postoperative follow-up ranged from 2-24 months. 15 patients had multilevel surgery (7 multiple segmental fusion, 8 hybrid procedures). Screw length ranged from 20-30 mm. No patient had new postoperative S1 nerve root irritation. Interestingly, 2 patients out of the hybrid group had a new onset of L5 radiculopathy, concordant to the level of disc-replacement. Follow-up x-ray review showed no fracture of S1 body fractures in all patients. No evidence of screw loosening, migration or metal work failure was reported. Conclusion. In our opinion, this review showed that insertion of longer screws for stand-alone anterior interbody fusion in L5/S1 is safe. Longer screws offer better stabilization and seem to minimize risks like S1 body fractures. Short and long-term follow-ups were satisfactory regarding screw placement, migration and positioning of implants in all patients