Surgical treatment of traumatic fractures of the thoracic and lumbar spine: A systematic review.

Autor:	Vercoulen TFG; Diakonessenhuis, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Bosboomstraat 1, 3582, KE, Utrecht, the Netherlands.; University Medical Center Utrecht, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584, CX, Utrecht, the Netherlands., Niemeyer MJS; University Medical Center Utrecht, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584, CX, Utrecht, the Netherlands., Peuker F; University Medical Center Utrecht, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584, CX, Utrecht, the Netherlands., Verlaan JJ; University Medical Center Utrecht, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584, CX, Utrecht, the Netherlands., Oner FC; University Medical Center Utrecht, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584, CX, Utrecht, the Netherlands., Sadiqi S; University Medical Center Utrecht, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584, CX, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	Brain & spine [Brain Spine] 2024 Jan 05; Vol. 4, pp. 102745. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Jan 05 (Print Publication: 2024).
DOI:	10.1016/j.bas.2024.102745
Abstrakt:	Introduction: The treatment of traumatic thoracic and lumbar spine fractures remains controversial. To date no consensus exists on the correct choice of surgical approach and technique. Research Question: to provide a comprehensive up-to-date overview of the available different surgical methods and their quantified outcomes. Methods: PubMed and EMBASE were searched between 2001 and 2020 using the term 'spinal fractures'. Inclusion criteria were: adults, ≥10 cases, ≥12 months follow-up, thoracic or lumbar fractures, and surgery <3 weeks of trauma. Studies were categorized per surgical technique: Posterior open (PO), posterior percutaneous (PP), stand-alone vertebral body augmentation (SA), anterior scopic (AS), anterior open (AO), posterior percutaneous and anterior open (PPAO), posterior percutaneous and anterior scopic (PPAS), posterior open and anterior open (POAO) and posterior open and anterior scopic (POAS). The PO group was used as a reference group. Results: After duplicate removal 6042 articles were identified. A total of 102 articles were Included, in which 137 separate surgical technique cohorts were described: PO (n = 75), PP, (n = 39), SA (n = 12), AO (n = 5), PPAO (n = 1), PPAS (n = 1), POAO (n = 2) and POAS (n = 2). Discussion and Conclusion: For type A3/A4 burst fractures, without severe neurological deficit, posterior percutaneous (PP) technique seems the safest and most feasible option in the past two decades. If needed, PP can be combined with anterior augmentation to prevent secondary kyphosis. Furthermore, posterior open (PO) technique is feasible in almost all types of fractures. Also, this technique can provide for an additional posterior decompression or fusion. Overall, no neurologic deterioration was reported following surgical intervention. Competing Interests: The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: J.J. Verlaan reports a relationship with 10.13039/100004320Philips Healthcare that includes: funding grants. J.J. Verlaan reports a relationship with SentryX that includes: board membership and equity or stocks. F.C. Oner reports a relationship with AO spine knowledge forum trauma that includes: board membership. F.C. Öner guest editor Brain and Spine If there are other authors, they declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. (© 2024 The Authors.)
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu