of T12 or L1 and to compare outcomes of transpedicular percutaneous fixation and open fixation. Material and Methods Retrospective study of patients with ...
Global Spine Journal 2017, Vol. 7(2S) 1S © The Author(s) 2017 Reprints and permission: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/2192568217709015 journals.sagepub.com/home/gsj
Global Spine Congress 2017 Abstracts Special Issue
Welcome to the Global Spine Congress 2017 Milan (GSC). After 6 years of being staged in different cities around the world, the AOSpine flagship event is coming back to Europe again. The GSC is one of the biggest gatherings for thousands of Spine surgeons from all over the world. The event provides an outstanding forum to exchange ideas, network with fellow spine professionals, and learn about the latest research, techniques, and technologies in spine surgery. The Global Spine Congress is unique in its approach to sharing knowledge and developing new approaches to the treatment of spinal disorders in order to help advance spine care. The congress is open to all surgeons, spine practitioners, allied health care professionals and researchers, and will offer a full schedule for 3 days. The Scientific Programme will include scientific symposia and prereviewed abstracts scheduled to be presented as oral or e-posters presentations. Over the years, the number of participants and speakers at the GSC has grown considerably. For the 2017 event, a record number of abstracts were submitted. The abstracts that were accepted to be presented at the GSC are published in this special online issue as a supplement to the Global Spine Journal. This book contains 737 carefully selected abstracts in the following areas: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.
Arthroplasty—cervical Arthroplasty—lumbar Basic Science Biomechanics Degenerative—cervical Degenerative—lumbar Deformity—thoracolumbar (Adult) Deformity—thoracolumbar (Adolescent) Deformity—cervical
10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25.
Diagnostics Disc degeneration Epidemiology Imaging Infections Medical economics Minimally invasive spine surgery Navigation Nonoperative clinical treatments Novel technologies Spine biologics Surgical complications Trauma—cervical Trauma—thoracolumbar Trauma—other Tumors
We also welcome the following international spine societies, who will be supporting the Global Spine Congress: North American Spine Society, American Association of Neurological Surgeons, Cervical Spine Research Society, Scoliosis Research Society, Eurospine, The European Association of Neurosurgical Societies, Deutsche Wirbelsa ülengesellschaft, Société Française de Chirurgie Rachidienne, Society of Lateral Access Surgery, Societa Italiana di Chirurgia Vertebrale – Gruppo Italiano Scoliosi. We are convinced that the oral presentations, symposia, and poster presentations will encourage lively discussions among participants and generate new ideas to help advance spine care. We hope you find it a valuable and rewarding experience. Jeffrey C. Wang Congress Chairperson Global Spine Congress
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/ licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work as published without adaptation or alteration, without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
Oral Presentation A228
How Far Can We Go with Percutaneous Fixation of Spinal Fractures? A Comparative Study with Open Fixation in 110 Patients with Fractures of the Thoracolumbar Transition (T12-L1) Alfredo Figueiredo, António Mendonça, Paulo Lourenço, Carlos Jardim, Carlos Alegre, Fernando Fonseca
Orthopaedic Surgery Department, Coimbra University Hospital, Coimbra (Portugal) Introduction Fractures of the thoracolumbar spine usually result from high energy trauma and have a higher incidence in the thoracolumbar transition. The surgical treatment aims to stabilize the spine and correct its alignment. The transpedicular fixation can be performed by a minimally invasive approach or by open surgery. The aim of this study is to analyze patients with vertebral body fractures of T12 or L1 and to compare outcomes of transpedicular percutaneous fixation and open fixation. Material and Methods Retrospective study of patients with vertebral body fractures of T12 or L1 without neurological signs who underwent percutaneous transpedicular fixation or open transpedicular fixation between January 2013 and April 2015. The sample CT scans were analyzed and the fractures grouped according to the AO classification. The segmental kyphosis angle and the degree of vertebral collapse before and after surgery were also saved in the database. Patients with less than 12 months of follow-up were excluded. The data obtained was analyzed with the software “STATA”. Results A total of 110 patients with vertebral body fractures of T12 or L1 were identified. Of this sample, 63 (57%) patients underwent percutaneous fixation and 47 (43%) open fixation. In the group of patients undergoing percutaneous fixation 35 (56%) were male and 28 (44%) female, with an average age of 55 years (18-82). There were 44 (70%) patients with isolated fractures of L1 and 19 (30%) with isolated fractures of T12; percutaneous fixation allowed the treatment of fractures of AO types A1 (14%), A2 (11%), A3 (16%), A4 (22%), B1 (34%) and B3 (3%); the average operative time was 60.3 minutes (30-105) and mean postoperative hospital stay was 4.2 days (2-9). In the group of patients undergoing open fixation 23 (49%) were male and 24 (51%) female, with an average age of 53 years (18-74). There were 30 (64%) patients with isolated fractures of L1 and 17 (36%) with isolated fractures of T12; open fixation was used to treat fractures of AO types A1 (11%), A2 (2%), A3 (21%), A4 (19%), B1 (9%), B2 (23%) and B3 (15%); the average operative time was 89 minutes (39-190) and mean postoperative hospital stay was 5.8 days (2 -17). The postoperative complications were: infection (1 case in a patient who underwent open fixation) and mechanical failure of the surgical implants (8 cases in patients undergoing percutaneous fixation). The average postoperative follow-up period of the 110 patients was 25 months (12-39). Conclusion The majority (57%) of the patients with fractures of T12 or L1 was treated by percutaneous fixation; this procedure allowed a shorter operative time and an earlier discharge and was used predominantly in the treatment of AO B1 fractures. However, it resulted in postoperative mechanical complications. On the other hand, open fixation allowed the surgical treatment of more severe fractures, although it resulted in longer operative and hospitalization times. Mechanical failure associated with percutaneous fixation suggests that these patients are candidates for removal of surgical implants as soon as the fracture is consolidated.
Global Spine J. 2017 May;7(2 Suppl):1S. doi: 10.1177/2192568217709015. PMID: 29242765. PMCID: PMC5724664 DOI: 10.1177/2192568217709015
