We reviewed 15 consecutive patients, 11 women and four men, with a mean age of 48.7 years (37.3 to 62.6), who between July 2004 and August 2007 had undergone percutaneous sacroiliac fusion using hollow modular anchorage screws filled with demineralised bone matrix. Each patient was carefully assessed to exclude other conditions and underwent pre-operative CT and MR scans. The diagnosis of symptomatic sacroiliac disease was confirmed by an injection of local anaesthetic and steroid under image intensifier control. The short form-36 questionnaire and Majeed’s scoring system were used for pre- and post-operative functional evaluation. Post-operative radiological evaluation was performed using plain radiographs. Intra-operative blood loss was minimal and there were no post-operative clinical or radiological complications. The mean follow-up was for 17 months (9 to 39). The mean short form-36 scores improved from 37 (23 to 51) to 80 (67 to 92) for physical function and from 53 (34 to 73) to 86 (70 to 98) for general health (p = 0.037). The mean Majeed’s score improved from 37 (18 to 54) pre-operatively to 79 (63 to 96) post-operatively (p = 0.014). There were 13 good to excellent results. The remaining two patients improved in short form-36 from a mean of 29 (26 to 35) to 48 (44 to 52). Their persistent pain was probably due to concurrent lumbar pathology. We conclude that percutaneous hollow modular anchorage screws are a satisfactory method of achieving sacroiliac fusion

Aims. Anchorage of pedicle screw rod instrumentation in the elderly spine with poor bone quality remains challenging. Our study aims to evaluate how the screw bone anchorage is affected by screw design, bone quality, loading conditions, and cementing techniques. Methods. Micro-finite element (µFE) models were created from micro-CT (μCT) scans of vertebrae implanted with two types of pedicle screws (L: Ennovate and R: S. 4. ). Simulations were conducted for a 10 mm radius region of interest (ROI) around each screw and for a full vertebra (FV) where different cementing scenarios were simulated around the screw tips. Stiffness was calculated in pull-out and anterior bending loads. Results. Experimental pull-out strengths were excellently correlated to the µFE pull-out stiffness of the ROI (R. 2. > 0.87) and FV (R. 2. > 0.84) models. No significant difference due to screw design was observed. Cement augmentation increased pull-out stiffness by up to 94% and 48% for L and R screws, respectively, but only increased bending stiffness by up to 6.9% and 1.5%, respectively. Cementing involving only one screw tip resulted in lower stiffness increases in all tested screw designs and loading cases. The stiffening effect of cement augmentation on pull-out and bending stiffness was strongly and negatively correlated to local bone density around the screw (correlation coefficient (R) = -0.95). Conclusion. This combined experimental, µCT and µFE study showed that regional analyses may be sufficient to predict fixation strength in pull-out and that full analyses could show that cement augmentation around pedicle screws increased fixation stiffness in both pull-out and bending, especially for low-density bone. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2021;10(12):797–806

Objectives

Cement augmentation of pedicle screws could be used to improve screw stability, especially in osteoporotic vertebrae. However, little is known concerning the influence of different screw types and amount of cement applied. Therefore, the aim of this biomechanical in vitro study was to evaluate the effect of cement augmentation on the screw pull-out force in osteoporotic vertebrae, comparing different pedicle screws (solid and fenestrated) and cement volumes (0 mL, 1 mL or 3 mL).

We describe the results of a prospective case series of patients with spondylolysis, evaluating a technique of direct stabilisation of the pars interarticularis with a construct that consists of a pair of pedicle screws connected by a U-shaped modular link passing beneath the spinous process. Tightening the link to the screws compresses bone graft in the defect in the pars, providing rigid intrasegmental fixation. We have carried out this procedure on 20 patients aged between nine and 21 years with a defect of the pars at L5, confirmed on CT. The mean age of the patients was 13.9 years (9 to 21). They had a grade I or less spondylolisthesis and no evidence of intervertebral degeneration on MRI. The mean follow-up was four years (2.3 to 7.3). The patients were assessed by the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and a visual analogue scale (VAS). At the latest follow-up, 18 patients had an excellent clinical outcome, with a significant (p < 0.001) improvement in their ODI and VAS scores. The mean ODI score at final follow-up was 8%. Assessment of the defect by CT showed a rate of union of 80%. There were no complications involving the internal fixation.

The strength of the construct removes the need for post-operative immobilisation.

Fracture of a pedicle is a rare complication of spinal instrumentation using pedicular screws, but it can lead to instability and pain and may necessitate extension of the fusion. Osteosynthesis of the fractured pedicle by cerclage-wire fixation and augmentation of the screw fixation by vertebroplasty or temporary elongation of the fixation, allows stabilisation without sacrifice of the adjacent healthy segment. We describe three patients who developed a fracture of the pedicle in the most caudal instrumented vertebra early after lumbar spinal fusion.

During revision surgery the pedicles were reduced and secured by a soft cerclage wire bilaterally. Fusion was obtained at the site of the primary instrumentation and healing of the pedicles was achieved. Cerclage wiring of the fractured pedicle seems to be safe and avoids permanent extension of the fusion without the sacrifice of an otherwise healthy segment.