Comparison of Efficacy between 3D Navigation-Assisted Percutaneous Iliosacral Screw and Minimally Invasive Reconstruction Plate in Treating Sacroiliac Complex Injury

Abstract

The clinical efficacy was compared between 3D navigation-assisted percutaneous iliosacral screw (3DPS) and minimally invasive reconstruction plate (MIRP) in treating sacroiliac complex injury and the surgical procedures of 3DPS were introduced. A retrospective analysis was performed on 49 patients with sacroiliac complex injury from March 2013 to May 2017. Twenty-one cases were treated by 3DPS, and 28 cases by MIRP. Intraoperative indexes as operative time, blood loss, incision length, length of hospital stay and postoperative complications were respectively documented. Quality of reduction was postoperatively evaluated by Matta radiological criteria, and clinical effect was assessed by Majeed scoring criteria at the last follow-up. Operative time and hospital stay were significantly shortened, and blood loss, and incision length were significantly reduced in 3DPS group as compared with those in MIRP group (P<0.05). No statistically significant difference was found between 3DPS group and MIRP group in the assessment of reduction and function (P>0.05). It was concluded that both 3DPS and MIRP can effectively treat the sacroiliac complex injury, and 3DPS can provide an accurate, safe and minimally invasive fixation with shorter operative time and hospital stay.

Keywords

sacroiliac complex injury / 3D navigation-assisted system / percutaneous iliosacral screw / minimally invasive reconstruction plate

References

[1] ZhangCM, LiuHY, ZhuZ, et al.. Effectiveness of percutaneous iliosacral screwing versus reconstruction plating for treatment of pelvic posterior ring fractures of Tile C: a Meta analysis. Chin J Orthop Trauma (Chinese), 2017, 9(6): 476-483

[2] AcklinYP, MarcoG, SommerC. Double locking plate fixation of sacral fractures in unstable pelvic ring C–type injuries. Oper Orthop Traumatol, 2015, 27(1): 74-79

[3] IorioJA, JakoiAM, RehmanS. Percutaneous Sacroiliac Screw Fixation of the Posterior Pelvic Ring. Orthop Clin North Am, 2015, 46(4): 511-521

[4] TlieM, HelfetDL, KellamJF, et al.. Comprehensive classification of fractures in the pelvis and acetabulum. Berne, Switzerland: Maurice. Muller Foundation, 1995

[5] Morel–LavalléeM. Decollements traumatiques de la peauet descouches sous–jacentes. Arch Gen Med, 1863, 1(4): 20-38

[6] TanZK, ChenZH, CaiXH, et al.. A prospective study of revised injury severity score in 2260 cases of trauma. J Orthop Trauma, 2007, 9(3): 236-238

[7] MattaJM, TornettaP. Internal fixation of unstable pelvic ring injuries. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 1996, 8(329): 129-140

[8] MajeedSA. Grading the outcome of pelvic fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Br, 1989, 71(2): 304-306

[9] ZhangJ, XieF. Application of damage control theory in the treatment of elderly unstable pelvic fractures. J Trauma Surg, 2016, 18(6): 346-349

[10] LiuzzaF, SilluzioN. Comparison between posterior sacral plate stabilization versus minimally invasive transiliac–transsacral lag–screw fixation in fractures of sacrum: a single–centre experience. Int Orthop, 2018, 42(10): 2459-2466

[11] SuzukiT, HakDJ, ZiranBH, et al.. Outcome and complications of posterior transiliac plating for vertically unstable sacral fractures. Injury, 2009, 40(4): 405-409

[12] BousbaaH, OuahidiM, LouasteJ, et al.. Percutaneous iliosacral screw fixation in unstable pelvic fractures. Pan Afr Med J, 2017, 27: 244

[13] KhaledSA, SolimanO, WahedMA. Functional outcome of unstable pelvic ring injuries after iliosacral screw fixation: single versus two screw fixation. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg, 2015, 41(4): 387-392

[14] CharlesYP. Sacroiliac joint luxation after pedicle subtraction osteotomy: report of two cases and analysis of failure mechanism. Eur Spine J, 2016, 25(1): 63-74

[15] KönigMA, HedigerS, SchmittJW, et al.. In–screw cement augmentation for iliosacral screw fixation in posterior ring pathologies with insufficient bone stock. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg, 2018, 44(2): 203-210

[16] GrechenigS, GänsslenA, GueorguievB, et al.. PMMAaugmented SI screw: a biomechanical analysis of stiffness and pull–out force in a matched paired human cadaveric model. Injury, 2015, 46(4): 125-128

[17] KimJW, QuispeJC, HaoJ, et al.. Fluoroscopic Views for a More Accurate Placement of Iliosacral Screws: An Experimental Study. J Orthop Trauma, 2016, 30(1): 34-40

[18] EastmanJ R M Jr. Correlating preoperative imaging with intraoperative fluoroscopy in iliosacral screw placement. J Orthop Traumatol, 2015, 16(4): 309-316

[19] McandrewCM, MerrimanDJ, GardnerMJ, et al.. Standardized Posterior Pelvic Imaging: Use of CT Inlet and CT Outlet for Evaluation and Management of Pelvic Ring Injuries. J Orthop Trauma, 2014, 28(12): 665-673

[20] AmiotLP, LangK, PutizerM, et al.. Comparative results between conventional and computer–assisted pedicle screw installation in the thoracic, lumbar, and sacral spine. Spine, 2000, 25(5): 606-614

[21] PetersP, LanglotzF, NolteLP. Computer assisted screw insertion real 3D rapid prototyping pelvis models. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon), 2002, 17(5): 376-382

[22] WangXZ, MengCF, WangGD, et al.. Three–dimensional navigation technology for placement of percutaneous sacroiliac joint screw internal fixation in treatment of sacroiliac complex injury. Chin J Orthop Trauma, 2016, 11(18): 921-926

[23] SawkarAA, SwischukLE, JadhavSP. Morel–Lavallee Seroma: A Review of Two Cases in the Lumbar Region in the Adolescent. Emerg Radiol, 2011, 18(6): 495-498