• Spine · Apr 2002

    Comparative Study

    Outcome and complications of long fusions to the sacrum in adult spine deformity: luque-galveston, combined iliac and sacral screws, and sacral fixation.

    • Arash Emami, Vedat Deviren, Sigurd Berven, Jason A Smith, Serena S Hu, and David S Bradford.
    • University of California, San Francisco, USA.
    • Spine. 2002 Apr 1;27(7):776-86.

    Study DesignA retrospective study of adults with long fusion to the sacrum using three different fixations was performed.ObjectiveTo compare the long-term clinical results and complications associated with three methods of lumbosacral fixation for adult spine deformities: Luque-Galveston, combined iliac and sacral screws, and sacral screws.Summary Of Background DataThe preferred technique for long fusion to the sacrum is controversial, and surgery for adult deformity is fraught with significant technical difficulties and high complication rates. No clinical study compares the long-term outcome of long fusion to the sacrum using these different methods of lumbosacral fixation.MethodsThis study included 54 consecutive patients who underwent elective combined anterior and posterior surgical reconstruction for adult spine deformity with a minimum follow-up period of 2 years. The patients were divided into three groups on the basis of the surgical method used for the posterior spine instrumentation. Group 1 consisted of 11 patients with smooth L-rod and segmental sublaminar wire instrumentation (Luque-Galveston technique). Group 2 consisted of 36 patients with posterior Isola segmental instrumentation and combined iliac and sacral screws. Group 3 consisted of 12 patients with Isola segmental instrumentation using bicortical sacral screws. Five patients were revised to another fixation group, giving a total of 59 cases. Radiographic, clinical results, and long-term outcome data were obtained using the modified Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) outcome instrument.ResultsThere were 26 late complications. Pseudarthrosis developed in 10 patients, requiring revision surgery: 4 (36%) in the Group 1, 5 (14%) in Group 2, and 1 (8.5%) in Group 3. Comparison of the modified SRS outcomes showed no difference among the groups. The average SRS grand total score was 73.4% for Group 1, 70.9% for Group 2, and 62.6% for Group 3. Overall, 76% of the patients were satisfied with their outcome. The presence of perioperative complications or pseudarthrosis significantly correlated with a lower satisfaction score (P = 0.012 and P = 0.048, respectively). Sagittal plane decompensation significantly correlated with a higher pain score (P = 0.035). Patients with prior surgeries scored lower on the self-image questions than patients with no prior surgery (P = 0.007).ConclusionsAttention to sagittal balance is critical in these patients. Revision surgery is as safe and effective as primary surgery. According to the current findings, the Luque-Galveston fixation technique has an unacceptably high rate of pseudarthrosis, and this method is not recommended for adult deformities. Currently, the authors are using bicortical and triangulated sacral screws with an anterior interbody support in patients with good bone stock, but only when the spine balance is restored. Otherwise, they recommend using iliac fixation, although there is a higher rate of painful hardware, requiring removal.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…