Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Sinterungsprophylaxe eines Wirbelkörperersatzes

Anteriore Zementaugmentation von Wirbelkörperendplatten

Sintering prophylaxis of a vertebral body replacement

Anterior cement augmentation of vertebral end plates

  • Leitthema
  • Published:
Der Orthopäde Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

Aufgrund der steigenden Zahl an alten und osteoporotischen Patienten steigt auch die Inzidenz komplexer Wirbelsäulenoperationen, bei denen ein Wirbelkörperersatz in diesem Kollektiv notwendig wird. Durch den Einsatz zementaugmentierter Schrauben konnte die Lockerungsrate bei dorsalen Eingriffen deutlich reduziert werden. Gleichsam ist es bei ventralen Eingriffen möglich die Endplatten so mit Zement zu verstärken, dass Cagesinterungen vermindert werden können. Die Technik ist einfach, schnell und sicher, da die Nadeln unter visueller Kontrolle gesetzt werden können. In einer ersten Serie von 20 Patienten konnten weder operationsspezifische Komplikationen noch aseptische Lockerungen festgestellt werden.

Abstract

Due to the increasing number of elderly patients with osteoporosis, the incidence of more complex operations demanding a vertebral body replacement is increasing in this population. Cement augmentation of pedicle screws helps to prevent screw pullout. Similarly it is possible to augment the end plates in anterior spine surgery in order to prevent cage subsidence. The technique is simple, quick and safe, as needles can be placed under visual control. In a series of 20 patients neither surgery-related complications nor aseptic loosening were found.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Abb. 1
Abb. 2
Abb. 3
Abb. 4
Abb. 5

Literatur

  1. Anekstein Y, Brosh T, Mirovsky Y (2007) Intermediate screws in short segment pedicular fixation for thoracic and lumbar fractures: a biomechanical study 12. J Spinal Disord Tech 20(1):72–77

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Beisse R, Potulski M, Temme C, Buhren V (1998) Endoscopically controlled division of the diaphragm. A minimally invasive approach to ventral management of thoracolumbar fractures of the spine 26. Unfallchirurg 101(8):619–627

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Enad JG, Slakey JB, McNulty PS (2008) Measurement of thoracolumbar kyphosis after burst fracture: evaluation of intraobserver, interobserver, and variability of 4 measurement methods 1. Am J Orthop 37(4):60–63

    Google Scholar 

  4. EPOS (2002) Incidence of vertebral fracture in europe: results from the European Prospective Osteoporosis Study (EPOS). J Bone Miner Res 17(4):716–724

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Frankel BM, Jones T, Wang C (2007) Segmental polymethylmethacrylate-augmented pedicle screw fixation in patients with bone softening caused by osteoporosis and metastatic tumor involvement: a clinical evaluation. Neurosurgery 61(3):531–537

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Kim HS, Park SK, Joy H et al (2008) Bone cement augmentation of short segment fixation for unstable burst fracture in severe osteoporosis. J Korean Neurosurg Soc 44(1):8–14

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Knop C, Lange U, Reinhold M, Blauth M (2005) Vertebral body replacement with synex in combined posteroanterior surgery for treatment of thoracolumbar injuries 35. Oper Orthop Traumatol 17(3):249–280

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Lange U, Edeling S, Knop C et al (2006) Titanium vertebral body replacement of adjustable size. A prospective clinical trial 25. Unfallchirurg 109(9):733–742

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. McArthur N, Kasperk C, Baier M et al (2009) 1150 kyphoplasties over 7 years: indications, techniques, and intraoperative complications 1. Orthopedics 32(2):90

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. McLain RF (2006) The biomechanics of long versus short fixation for thoracolumbar spine fractures. Spine 31(Suppl 11):70–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Reinhold M, Knop C, Beisse R et al (2009) Operative treatment of traumatic fractures of the thorax and lumbar spine. Part II: surgical treatment and radiological findings 2. Unfallchirurg 112(2):149–167

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Tan JS, Bailey CS, Dvorak MF et al (2007) Cement augmentation of vertebral screws enhances the interface strength between interbody device and vertebral body. Spine 32(3):334–341

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Tan JS, Singh S, Zhu QA et al (2008) The effect of cement augmentation and extension of posterior instrumentation on stabilization and adjacent level effects in the elderly spine. Spine 33(25):2728–2740

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Ulmar B, Richter M, Kelsch G et al (2005) Distractible vertebral body replacement for the thoracic and lumbar spine. Acta Orthop Belg 71(4):467–471

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Vieweg U, Solch O, Kalff R (2003) Vertebral body replacement system synex in unstable burst fractures of the thoracic and lumbar spine–a retrospective study with 30 patients. Zentralbl Neurochir 64(2):58–64

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Interessenkonflikt

Der korrespondierende Autor gibt an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to F. Geiger.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Geiger, F., Kafchitsas, K. & Rauschmann, M. Sinterungsprophylaxe eines Wirbelkörperersatzes. Orthopäde 39, 699–703 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00132-010-1604-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00132-010-1604-6

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Navigation