Preprint Article Version 1 This version is not peer-reviewed

Revision Methods for Rod Fracture after Pedicle Subtraction Osteotomy in Adult Spinal Deformity: Comparative Analysis between Simple Rod Replacement, Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion around Pedicle Subtraction Osteotomy Site, and Accessory Rod Integra

Version 1 : Received: 13 September 2024 / Approved: 13 September 2024 / Online: 13 September 2024 (11:51:32 CEST)

How to cite: Lee, K. Y.; Lee, J.-H.; Han, G.; Jung, C.-H.; Park, H. S. Revision Methods for Rod Fracture after Pedicle Subtraction Osteotomy in Adult Spinal Deformity: Comparative Analysis between Simple Rod Replacement, Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion around Pedicle Subtraction Osteotomy Site, and Accessory Rod Integra. Preprints 2024, 2024091084. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202409.1084.v1 Lee, K. Y.; Lee, J.-H.; Han, G.; Jung, C.-H.; Park, H. S. Revision Methods for Rod Fracture after Pedicle Subtraction Osteotomy in Adult Spinal Deformity: Comparative Analysis between Simple Rod Replacement, Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion around Pedicle Subtraction Osteotomy Site, and Accessory Rod Integra. Preprints 2024, 2024091084. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202409.1084.v1

Abstract

Background: Rod fracture (RF) is the most common cause of revision in adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery, and various treatment strategies for preventing RF are reported in literature. This retrospective study involving 139 ASD patients (aged ≥65 years and a minimum 2-year follow-up) who underwent long-segment fixation from T10 to sacrum with pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO), analyzed long-term results, including radiographical parameters and the incidence of recurrent RF (re-RF), to determine the most effective revision method for preventing RF. Methods: Patients were classified into three groups according to the revision method performed for RF; simple rod replacement (SR group, n=17), lateral lumbar interbody fusion around PSO site (LLIF group, n=8), and accessory rod integration (AR group, n=22). Baseline characteristics, radiographical and clinical parameters were analyzed. Results: RF occurred in 47 patients (34%) at an average of 28 months following primary deformity correction. Re-RF occurred in six patients (13%) at an average of 37 months. Re-RF occurred most commonly in SR group (p=.048). Every re-RF in SR group occurred at the PSO site, none occurred in LLIF group, and one in AR group occurred near L4–5. After both primary deformity correction and revision surgery, spinopelvic parameters had shown favorable results and clinical outcomes had improved in all three groups, without significant intergroup differences. Conclusions: Accessory rod integration or additional LLIF around the PSO site seems to provide greater strength and stability to the previously fused segments than simple rod replacement, which demonstrates the need for additional support in revision surgery for RF after PSO.

Keywords

accessory rod; adult spinal deformity; lateral lumbar interbody fusion; pedicle subtraction osteotomy; revision surgery; rod fracture

Subject

Medicine and Pharmacology, Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

Comments (0)

We encourage comments and feedback from a broad range of readers. See criteria for comments and our Diversity statement.

Leave a public comment
Send a private comment to the author(s)
* All users must log in before leaving a comment
Views 0
Downloads 0
Comments 0


×
Alerts
Notify me about updates to this article or when a peer-reviewed version is published.
We use cookies on our website to ensure you get the best experience.
Read more about our cookies here.