Aims

The authors present the results of a cohort study of 60 adult patients presenting sequentially over a period of 15 years from 1997 to 2012 to our hospital for treatment of thoracic and/or lumbar vertebral burst fractures, but without neurological deficit.

Aims

The aim of this study was to report a retrospective, consecutive series of patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) who were treated with posterior minimally invasive surgery (MIS) with a mean follow-up of two years (sd 1.4; 0.9 to 0 3.7). Our objectives were to measure the correction of the deformity and record the peri-operative morbidity. Special attention was paid to the operating time (ORT), estimated blood loss (EBL), length of stay (LOS) and further complications.

The April 2015 Spine Roundup360 looks at: Hyperostotic spine in injury; App based back pain control; Interspinous process devices should be avoided in claudication; Robot assisted pedicle screws: fad or advance?; Vancomycin antibiotic power in spinal surgery; What to do with that burst fracture?; Increasing complexity of spinal fractures in major trauma pathways; Vitamin D and spinal fractures

The August 2014 Spine Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: rhBMP complicates cervical spine surgery; posterior longitudinal ligament revisited; thoracolumbar posterior instrumentation without fusion in burst fractures; risk modelling for VTE events in spinal surgery; the consequences of dural tears in microdiscectomy; trends in revision spinal surgery; radiofrequency denervation likely effective in facet joint pain and hooks optimally biomechanically transition posterior instrumentation.

The June 2013 Spine Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: the benefit of MRI in the follow-up of lumbar disc prolapse; gunshot injury to the spinal cord; the link between depression and back pain; floating dural sack sign; short segment fixation at ten years; whether early return to play is safer than previously thought; infection in diabetic spinal patients; and dynesis.

The purpose of this study was to determine whether patients with a burst fracture of the thoracolumbar spine treated by short segment pedicle screw fixation fared better clinically and radiologically if the affected segment was fused at the same time. A total of 50 patients were enrolled in a prospective study and assigned to one of two groups. After the exclusion of three patients, there were 23 patients in the fusion group and 24 in the non-fusion group. Follow-up was at a mean of 23.9 months (18 to 30). Functional outcome was evaluated using the Greenough Low Back Outcome Score. Neurological function was graded using the American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale. Radiological outcome was assessed on the basis of the angle of kyphosis.

Peri-operative blood transfusion requirements and duration of surgery were significantly higher in the fusion group (p = 0.029 and p < 0.001, respectively). There were no clinical or radiological differences in outcome between the groups (all outcomes p > 0.05). The results of this study suggest that adjunctive fusion is unnecessary when managing patients with a burst fracture of the thoracolumbar spine with short segment pedicle screw fixation.

There are three basic concepts that are important to the biomechanics of pedicle screw-based instrumentation. First, the outer diameter of the screw determines pullout strength, while the inner diameter determines fatigue strength. Secondly, when inserting a pedicle screw, the dorsal cortex of the spine should not be violated and the screws on each side should converge and be of good length. Thirdly, fixation can be augmented in cases of severe osteoporosis or revision.

A trajectory parallel or caudal to the superior endplate can minimise breakage of the screw from repeated axial loading. Straight insertion of the pedicle screw in the mid-sagittal plane provides the strongest stability.

Rotational stability can be improved by adding transverse connectors. The indications for their use include anterior column instability, and the correction of rotational deformity.

It has been proposed that intervertebral disc degeneration might be caused by low-grade infection. The purpose of the present study was to assess the incidence of herpes viruses in intervertebral disc specimens from patients with lumbar disc herniation. A polymerase chain reaction based assay was applied to screen for the DNA of eight different herpes viruses in 16 patients and two controls. DNA of at least one herpes virus was detected in 13 specimens (81.25%). Herpes Simplex Virus type-1 (HSV-1) was the most frequently detected virus (56.25%), followed by Cytomegalovirus (CMV) (37.5%). In two patients, co-infection by both HSV-1 and CMV was detected. All samples, including the control specimens, were negative for Herpes Simplex Virus type-2, Varicella Zoster Virus, Epstein Barr Virus, Human Herpes Viruses 6, 7 and 8. The absence of an acute infection was confirmed both at the serological and mRNA level.

To our knowledge this is the first unequivocal evidence of the presence of herpes virus DNA in intervertebral disc specimens of patients with lumbar disc herniation suggesting the potential role of herpes viruses as a contributing factor to the pathogenesis of degenerative disc disease.

Impacted bone allograft is often used in revision joint replacement. Hydroxyapatite granules have been suggested as a substitute or to enhance morcellised bone allograft. We hypothesised that adding osteogenic protein-1 to a composite of bone allograft and non-resorbable hydroxyapatite granules (ProOsteon) would improve the incorporation of bone and implant fixation. We also compared the response to using ProOsteon alone against bone allograft used in isolation. We implanted two non-weight-bearing hydroxyapatite-coated implants into each proximal humerus of six dogs, with each implant surrounded by a concentric 3 mm gap. These gaps were randomly allocated to four different procedures in each dog: 1) bone allograft used on its own; 2) ProOsteon used on its own; 3) allograft and ProOsteon used together; or 4) allograft and ProOsteon with the addition of osteogenic protein-1.

After three weeks osteogenic protein-1 increased bone formation and the energy absorption of implants grafted with allograft and ProOsteon. A composite of allograft, ProOsteon and osteogenic protein-1 was comparable, but not superior to, allograft used on its own.

ProOsteon alone cannot be recommended as a substitute for allograft around non-cemented implants, but should be used to extend the volume of the graft, preferably with the addition of a growth factor.