Comparison of anterolateral and posterior approaches in the management of thoracolumbar burst fractures

Restricted access

Object

The authors undertook a retrospective cohort study of patients with T11–L2 thoracolumbar burst fractures who underwent decompression and the placement of instrumentation via the anterolateral or posterior approach.

Methods

There were 63 thoracolumbar burst fractures in 45 male and 18 female patients. The instrumentation was placed posteriorly in 25 patients and anterolaterally in 38. The mean follow-up duration after discharge from the hospital was 1.8 years (range 6 months–8 years).

The mean preoperative Frankel scores in the anterolateral and posterior groups were 3.7 ± 1.1 and 3.5 ± 1.4, respectively (p = 0.4155). Preoperative angular deformity in the anterolateral and posterior groups measured 11.9 ± 9.7 and 4.1 ± 7.1°, respectively (p = 0.0007). Postoperatively, angular deformity had been corrected to 2.0 ± 7.9 and 3.4 ± 7.5° in both groups, respectively (p = 0.565). The follow-up Frankel scores had improved to 4.2 ± 0.8 and 4.0 ± 1.4 (p = 0.461). At the latest follow-up examination, angular deformity had progressed to 4.5 ± 9.3° in the anterolateral group and to 9.8 ± 9.4° in the posterior group (p = 0.024).

Although surgeons’ fees were significantly (p = 0.0024) higher for patients who underwent anterolateral procedures ($27,940 ± 4390) than for those who underwent posterior surgery ($18,270 ± 6980), there was no intergroup difference in total cost of hospitalization.

Conclusions

Rigid guidelines for the selection of anterior or posterior approaches are lacking. Evaluation of the authors’ results and those of others shows that angular deformity is more successfully corrected and maintained when the anterior approach is used.

Abbreviations used in this paper:AP = anteroposterior; CFC = carbon fiber cage; CT = computed tomography; MR = magnetic resonance; PS = pedicle screw; SF-36 = 36-Item Short Form Health Survey; VB = vertebral body.

Article Information

Address reprint requests to: Patrick W. Hitchon, M.D., Department of Neurosurgery, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, 200 Hawkins Drive, Iowa City, Iowa 52240. email: patrick-hitchon@uiowa.edu.

© AANS, except where prohibited by US copyright law.

Headings

Figures

  • View in gallery

    Bar graph showing the distribution of thoracolumbar burst fractures by level in both anterior and posterior surgical groups.

  • View in gallery

    The posterior approach. Studies obtained in a 47-year-old man who fell off a grain truck and sustained an L-1 burst fracture. He was neurologically intact but complained of back and hip pain. A: Plain lateral radiograph revealing significant VB height loss and canal compromise. B: Axial CT scan showing canal narrowing, retropulsion of bone, and increase in interpedicular distance. C: Sagittal T2-weighted MR image demonstrating cauda equina compression. Three days following his injury, the patient underwent placement of posterior instrumentation comprising PSs, hooks, and an iliac crest graft. D and E: Five-year follow-up plain AP (D) and lateral (E) radiographs showing a solid fusion at T-12, L-1, and L-2. The rostral hooks are dislodged but stable. The patient remains neurologically intact but is disabled from pain.

  • View in gallery

    The anterolateral approach. Studies obtained in a 47-year-old man who fell off a horse and sustained an L-2 burst fracture. A: Plain lateral radiograph showing loss in VB height and retropulsion of bone into the canal. B: Axial CT scan obtained through the fracture showing the compromised canal with a 40% residual AP dimension. C: Sagittal T2-weighted MR image demonstrating retropulsion of bone and the compromised canal. D and E: To decompress the canal, a left-sided flank approach was selected for an L-2 corpectomy, anterior CFCs containing autologous strut graft, and lateral dual rod–screw fixation, as seen in the AP (D) and lateral (E) projections. Angulation was corrected from 0° on admission to −14° 10 months after surgery.

  • View in gallery

    Bar graph showing deformity angles at admission, discharge, and latest follow up in the anterior (black bars) and posterior (white bars) instrumentation groups. Values on the y axis reflect degrees. The asterisks denote statistical significance (p < 0.05).

  • View in gallery

    Bar graph showing preoperative and follow-up Frankel scores (y axis). At follow up, improvement in Frankel scores is noted irrespective of the approach (p > 0.05). The difference in Frankel scores between the two groups is not significant on admission or at follow up; however, the improvement in the Frankel score was significant within each group—anterolateral (p = 0.0009; black bars) and posterior (p = 0.004; white bars).

  • View in gallery

    Bar graph illustrating the distribution of mean SF-36 scores obtained in 22 patients who underwent anterolat-eral surgery (black bars) and 18 patients who underwent posterior surgery (white bars). No significant intergroup difference in scores is noted.

  • View in gallery

    Bar graph showing operating room charges, surgeon’s fee, implant cost, and total hospital charges. Asterisk indicates statistically significant difference. Black bars = anterior surgery; white bars = posterior surgery.

References

1

Alvine GFSwain JMAsher MABurton DC: Treatment of thoracolumbar burst fractures with variable screw placement or Isola instrumentation and arthrodesis: case series and literature review. J Spinal Disord Tech 17:2512642004

2

Bohlman HH: Treatment of fractures and dislocations of the thoracic and lumbar spine. J Bone Joint Surg Am 67:1651691985

3

Boriani SBiagini RBandiera SGasbarrini ADe Lure F: Reconstruction of the anterior column of the thoracic and lumbar spine with a carbon fiber stackable cage system. Orthopedics 25:37422002

4

Bridwell KHLenke LGMcEnery KWBaldus CBlanke K: Anterior fresh frozen structural allografts in the thoracic and lumbar spine. Do they work if combined with posterior fusion and instrumentation in adult patients with kyphosis or anterior column defects?. Spine 20:141014181995

5

Cantor JBLebwohl NHGarvey TEismont FJ: Nonoperative management of stable thoracolumbar burst fractures with early ambulation and bracing. Spine 18:9719761993

6

Cotler HBCotler JMStoloff ACohn HEJerrell BEMartinez L: The use of autografts for vertebral body replacement of the thoracic and lumbar spine. Spine 10:7487561985

7

Danisa OAShaffrey CIJane JAWhitehill RWang GWSzabo TA: Surgical approaches for the correction of unstable thoracolumbar burst fractures: a retrospective analysis of treatment outcomes. J Neurosurg 83:9779831995

8

Denis F: The three column spine and its significance in the classification of acute thoracolumbar spinal injuries. Spine 8:8178311983

9

Domenicucci MPreite RRamieri ACiapetta PDelfini RRomanini L: Thoracolumbar fractures without neurosurgical involvement: surgical or conservative treatment. J Neurosurg Sci 40:1101996

10

Dvorak MFKwon BKFisher CGEiserloh HL IIIBoyd MWing PC: Effectiveness of titanium mesh cylindrical cages in anterior column reconstruction after thoracic and lumbar vertebral body resection. Spine 28:9029082003

11

Eck KRBridwell KHUngacta FFLapp MALenke LGRiew KD: Analysis of titanium mesh cages in adults with minimum two-year follow-up. Spine 25:240724152000

12

Esses SIBotsford DJKostuik JP: Evaluation of surgical treatment for burst fractures. Spine 15:6676731990

13

Finkelstein JAChapman JRMirza S: Anterior cortical allo-graft in thoracolumbar fractures. J Spinal Disord 12:4244291999

14

Frankel HLHancock DOHyslop GMelzack JMichaelis LSUngar GH: The value of postural reduction in the initial management of closed injuries of the spine with paraplegia and tetraplegia. I Paraplegia 7:1791921969

15

Gertzbein SD: Scoliosis Research Society: multicenter spine fracture study. Spine 17:5285401992

16

Gertzbein SD: Spine update. Classification of thoracic and lumbar fractures. Spine 19:6266281994

17

Hitchon PWGoel VKRogge TNTorner JCDooris APDrake JS: In vitro biomechanical analysis of three anterior thoracolumbar implants. J Neurosurg 93:(2 Suppl)2522582000

18

Hitchon PWTorner JC: Recumbency in thoracolumbar fractures. Neurosurg Clin N Am 8:5095171997

19

Hitchon PWTorner JCHaddad SFFollett KA: Management options in thoracolumbar burst fractures. Surg Neurol 49:6196271998

20

Kaneda KTaneichi HAbumi KHashimoto TSatoh SFujiya M: Anterior decompression and stabilization with the Kaneda device for thoracolumbar burst fractures associated with neurological deficits. J Bone Joint Surg Am 79:69831997

21

Lemons VRWagner FCMontesano PX: Management of thoracolumbar fractures with accompanying neurological injury. Neurosurgery 30:6676711992

22

Lewandrowski KHecht ACDeLaney TFChapman PAHornicek FJPedlow FX: Anterior spinal arthrodesis with structural cortical allografts and instrumentation for spine tumor surgery. Spine 29:115011592004

23

Manabe STateishi AAbe MOhno T: Surgical treatment of metastatic tumors of the spine. Spine 14:41471989

24

McAfee PC: Complications of anterior approaches to the thoracolumbar spine. Emphasis on Kaneda instrumentation. Clin Orthop Relat Res 306:1101191994

25

McAfee PCBohlman HHYuan HA: Anterior decompression of traumatic thoracolumbar fractures with incomplete neurological deficit using a retroperitoneal approach. J Bone Joint Surg Am 67:891041985

26

McLain RF: Functional outcomes after surgery for spinal fractures: return to work and activity. Spine 29:4704772004

27

McLain RFBurkus JKBenson DR: Segmental instrumentation for thoracic and thoracolumbar fractures: prospective analysis of construct survival and 5 year follow-up. Spine J 1:3103232001

28

Meding JBStambough JL: Critical analysis of strut grafts in anterior spinal fusions. J Spinal Disord 6:1661741993

29

Molinari RWBridwell KHKlepps SJBaldus C: Minimum 5-year follow-up of anterior column structural allografts in the thoracic and lumbar spine. Spine 23:9679721999

30

Mumford JWeinstein JNSpratt KFGoel VK: Thoracolumbar burst fractures. The clinical efficacy and outcome of nonoperative management. Spine 18:9559701993

31

Parker JWLane JRKaraikovic EEGaines RW: Successful short-segment instrumentation and fusion for thoracolumbar spine fractures: a consecutive 4½ year series. Spine 25:115711692000

32

Rechtine GR IICahill DChrin AM: Treatment of thoracolum-bar trauma: comparison of complications of operative versus nonoperative treatment. J Spinal Disord 12:4064091999

33

Reid DCHu RDavis LASaboe LA: The nonoperative treatment of burst fractures of the thoracolumbar junction. J Trauma 28:118811941988

34

Seybold EASweeney CAFredrickson BEWarhold LGBernini PM: Functional outcome of low lumbar burst fractures. A multicenter review of operative and nonoperative treatment of L3-l5. Spine 24:215421611999

35

Shen WJLiu TJShen YS: Nonoperative treatment versus posterior fixation for thoracolumbar junction burst fractures without neurologic deficits. Spine 26:103810452001

36

Stephens GCDevito DPMcNamara MJ: Segmental fixation of lumbar burst fractures with Cotrel-Dubousset instrumentation. J Spinal Disord 5:3443481992

37

Verlaan JJDiekerhof CHBuskens Evan der Tweel IVerbout AJDhert WJ: Surgical treatment of traumatic fractures of the thoracic and lumbar spine: a systematic review of the literature on techniques, complications, and outcome. Spine 29:8038142004

TrendMD

Metrics

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 5 5 5
Full Text Views 18 18 11
PDF Downloads 9 9 2
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0

PubMed

Google Scholar