Efficacy of percutaneous pedicle screws for thoracic and lumbar spine fractures compared with open technique.

Abstract

Background: The objective of this study is to compare percutaneous techniques (MIS) with the open technique in terms of angle correction, long-term maintenance and clinical results.

Methods: The authors collected a prospective database of thoraco-lumbar fractures treated with posterior stabilization without fusion from 2013 to 2019. The statistical analysis has been carried out retrospectively. The patients were classified into Open and MIS group. To compare the two population, samples, treatments and mitigate the differences between the groups, the propensity score (PS) matching was used.

Results: One hundred and eight patients with thoraco-lumbar fractures were included. After performing the PS, 21 patients were obtained in the open group and 28 in the MIS group. For operative and perioperative parameters there were no differences in number of patients with posterior decompression, number of instrumented segments, number of total screws, operative time and complications. Postoperative hemoglobin was similar in both groups. However, in the open group a greater loss of hemoglobin was observed; as well as, higher analgesia requirements and length of stay. No statistically significant differences were observed in neurological status in both groups in the preoperative, postoperative period and at follow-up. The Cobb angle showed no differences at admission comparing both groups. A similar angle correction was observed with both surgeries, but in open surgery there was a statistically significant loss of correction.

Conclusions: We observed in this study that the MIS technique for the treatment of thoracolumbar fractures is as effective as the open technique in terms of angle correction; and demonstrated that is better in its maintenance over time. Clinical results were at least as good as with the open technique.