Explore the vast range of titles available.

PurposeSurgical treatment of jumper’s fractures is a highly demanding situation for the surgeon due to its rareness and frequent association with severe concomitant injuries. There is no current consensus regarding a standard treatment approach, thus reducing quality of care. Our objectives were to describe, apply and assess a novel surgical technic.MethodsThe presented research is an observational retrospective study of patients who underwent the described novel surgical intervention in a level 1 trauma center. We conducted analyses of the patient cohort using patient-related outcome measures at least 1 year after surgery, as well as investigating pain, quality of life and the clinical effectiveness of the procedure.ResultsA total of 24 patients (17 male and 7 female) with an average age 47 ± 16.3 years were included. ISS scores ranged from 9 to 66 with a mean ISS of 40 ± 15. Clinical scores exist of 15 out of 24 patients (62.5%). The mean VAS score was 53.7 ± 12.9. The mean EQ-5D index was 0.68 ± 0.22. Significant negative correlation existed between the ISS value and the EQ-5D index (r =  − 0.704; p < 0.005) and EQ-5D VAS (r =  − 0.809; p < 0.001). Anatomical reduction was achieved in all patients (n = 24). Radiological follow-up was performed in 58%.ConclusionWe present one of the largest studies with operatively treated jumper’s fractures of the sacrum. The technique is capable of reproducibly restoring the physiological anatomy of the patient and allows pain-adapted mobilization.

Background Resection of pelvic and sacral tumors can cause severe blood loss, complications, and even postoperative death. Hypotensive epidural anesthesia has been used to mitigate blood loss after elective arthroplasty, but to our knowledge, it has not been studied as an approach that might make resection of pelvic and sacral tumors safer. Questions/purposes The purposes of this study were (1) to compare the blood loss and blood product use for patients undergoing pelvic and sacral tumor surgery under standard anesthesia or hypotensive epidural anesthesia; (2) to assess the frequency of end-organ damage with the two techniques; and (3) to compare 90-day mortality between the two techniques. Methods Between 2000 and 2014, 285 major pelvic and sacral resections were performed at one center. A total of 174 (61%) had complete data sets for analysis of blood loss, transfusion use, complications, and mortality at 90 days. Of those, 102 (59%) underwent hypotensive epidural anesthesia, whereas the remainder received standard anesthetic care. The anesthetic approach was determined by the anesthetists in charge of the case with hypotensive epidural anesthesia exclusively performed by one of two subspecialty trained anesthetists as their routine for major pelvic or sacral surgery. The groups were comparable in terms of potential confounding variables such as age, gender, tumor volume, and operation performed. Hypotensive epidural anesthesia was defined as a technique using an extensive epidural block up to T2-3 dermatome, peripherally administered low-concentration intravenous adrenaline infusion, and using unimpeded spontaneous respiration to achieve controlled hypotension, precise rate control of the heart, and enhanced velocity of venous return, all aggregated thus to minimize blood loss during pelvic surgery while preserving vital perfusion. The groups were assessed for perioperative blood loss calculated from pre- and postsurgery hemoglobin and transfusion use as well as postoperative complications, morbidity, and mortality at 90 days. Results There was less mean blood loss in the hypotensive epidural anesthesia group (1457 mL, SD 1721, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1114–1801 versus 2421 mL, SD 2297, 95% CI, 1877–2965; p = 0.003). Patients in the hypotensive epidural anesthesia group on average received fewer packed red cell transfusions (2.7 units, SD 2.9, 95% CI, 2.1–3.2 versus 3.9 units, SD 4.4, 95% CI, 2.9–5.0; p = 0.03). There were no differences in the proportions of patients experiencing end-organ injury (7%, n = seven of 102 versus 6%, n = four of 72; p = 0.72). With the numbers available, there was no difference in 90-day mortality rate between groups (1.9%, n = two of 102 versus 1.3%, n = one of 72; p = 0.77). Conclusions We found that hypotensive epidural anesthesia resulted in less blood loss, fewer transfusions, and no apparent increase in serious complications in pelvic and sacral tumor surgery performed in the setting of a high-volume tertiary sarcoma referral hospital. We recommend that further collaborative studies be undertaken to confirm our results with hypotensive epidural anesthesia in surgery for pelvic tumors. Level of Evidence Level III, therapeutic study.

PurposePelvic fragility fractures have steadily risen over the past decades. The primary treatment goal is the fastest possible mobilisation. If conservative therapy fails, surgical fixation is a promising approach. This study compares the outcome of bisegmental transsacral stabilisation (BTS) and spinopelvic fixation (SP) as minimally invasive techniques for bilateral fragility fractures of the sacrum (BFFS).MethodsWe performed a prospective, non-randomised, case-controlled study. Patients were included if they remained bedridden due to pain despite conservative treatment. Group assignment depended on sacral anatomy and fracture type. The outcome was estimated by blood loss calculation, cut-seam time, fluoroscopy time, complications, duration of stay at the intensive/intermediate care unit (ICU/IMC), and total inpatient stay. The mobility level at discharge was recorded.ResultsSeventy-three patients were included (SP: 49, BTS: 24). There was no difference in blood loss (BTS: 461 ± 628 mL, SP: 509 ± 354 mL). BTS showed a significantly lower cut-seam time (72 ± 23 min) than SP (94 ± 27 min). Fluoroscopy time did not differ (BTS: 111 ± 61 s vs. 103 ± 45 s). Thirteen percent of BTS and 16% of SP patients required ICU/IMC stay (BTS: 0.6 ± 1.8 days, SP: 0.5 ± 1.5 days) during inpatient stay (BTS: 9 ± 4 days, SP: 8 ± 3 days). Fourteen patients suffered from urinary tract infections (BTS: 8%; SP: 25%). In-patient mortality was low (BTS: 4.2%, SP: 4.1%). At discharge, the BTS group was almost back to the initial mobility level. In SP patients, mobility was significantly lower than before complaints (p = 0.004).ConclusionBoth methods allow early mobilization of BFFS patients. Blood loss can be kept low. Hence, transfusion requirement is correspondingly low. The IMC/ICU and the total inpatient stay are lower than reported in the literature. Both BTS and SP can be recommended as safe and low-complication methods for use in BFFS patients. BTS is superior to SP with respect to surgery duration and level of mobility at discharge.

ObjectiveTo determine the feasibility of designing and conducting a definitive trial to evaluate the effectiveness of sacral fracture fixation compared with non-surgical management among older people admitted with a lateral compression pelvic fragility fracture (PFF).DesignSingle-site, parallel, two-arm randomised controlled feasibility trial.SettingA UK tertiary centre hospital.ParticipantsPatients aged ≥70 years who were ambulating pre-injury requiring hospital admission (within 28 days of injury) with a type 1 lateral compression PFF.InterventionsThe intervention group received sacral fracture fixation (cement augmentation±screw fixation) within 7 days of randomisation. Routine preoperative and postoperative care followed each surgical intervention. The control group received usual care consisting of analgesia, and regular input from the medical and therapy team.Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe feasibility outcomes were the number of eligible patients, willingness to be randomised, adherence to allocated treatment, retention, data on the completeness and variability of the proposed definitive trial outcome measures, and reported adverse events.Results241 patients were screened. 13 (5.4%) were deemed eligible to participate. Among the eligible participants, nine (69.2%) were willing to participate. Five participants were randomised to the intervention group and four to the control group. The clinicians involved were willing to allow their patients to be randomised and adhere to the allocated treatment. One participant in the intervention group and two participants in the control group received their allocated treatment. All participants were followed up until 12 weeks post-randomisation, and had an additional safety follow-up assessment at 12 months. Overall, the proportion of completeness of outcome measures was at least 75%. No adverse events were directly related to the trial.ConclusionsThere were significant challenges in recruiting sufficient participants which will need to be addressed prior to a definitive trial.Trial registration number ISRCTN16719542.

Background There is no standard treatment for giant cell tumors of the sacrum. We compared the outcomes and complications in patients with sacral giant cell tumors who underwent intralesional nerve-sparing surgery with or without (neo-) adjuvant therapies versus those who underwent non-surgical treatment (denosumab therapy and/or embolization). Methods We retrospectively investigated 15 cases of sacral giant cell tumors treated at two institutions between 2005 and 2020. Nine patients underwent intralesional nerve-sparing surgery with or without (neo-) adjuvant therapies, and six patients received non-surgical treatment. The mean follow-up period was 85 months for the surgical group (range, 25–154 months) and 59 months (range, 17–94 months) for the non-surgical group. Results The local recurrence rate was 44% in the surgical group, and the tumor progression rate was 0% in the non-surgical group. There were two surgery-related complications (infection and bladder laceration) and three denosumab-related complications (apical granuloma of the tooth, stress fracture of the sacroiliac joint, and osteonecrosis of the jaw). In the surgical group, the mean modified Biagini score (bowel, bladder, and motor function) was 0.9; in the non-surgical group, it was 0.5. None of the 11 female patients became pregnant or delivered a baby after developing a sacral giant cell tumor. Conclusions The cure rate of intralesional nerve-sparing surgery is over 50%. Non-surgical treatment has a similar risk of complications to intralesional nerve-sparing surgery and has better functional outcomes than intralesional nerve-sparing surgery, but patients must remain on therapy over time. Based on our results, the decision on the choice of treatment for sacral giant cell tumors could be discussed between the surgeon and the patient based on the tumor size and location.

Objective To report our experience in percutaneous sacroplasty (PSP) for tumours and insufficiency fractures of the sacrum. Methods Single-centre retrospective analysis of 58 consecutive patients who underwent 67 PSPs for intractable pain from sacral tumours (84.5 %) or from osteoporotic fractures (15.5 %). The following data were assessed: visual analogue scale (VAS) before and after the procedure for global pain; short-term (1-month) clinical follow-up using a four-grade patient satisfaction scale (worse, unchanged, mild improvement and significant improvement); modification in analgesics consumption; referred short-term walking mobility. Minor and major complications were systematically assessed. Results The mean VAS score was 5.3 ± 2.0 in pre-procedure and 1.7 ± 1.8 in post-procedure. At 1-month follow-up, 34/58 (58.5 %) patients experienced a mild improvement; 15/58 (26 %) presented a significant improvement while 4/58 (7 %) and 5/58 (8.5 %) patients had unchanged or worse pain, respectively. Decreased analgesic consumption was observed in 34 % (20/58) of the patients. Eighty percent of patients with walking limitation experienced improvement, 16 % remained unchanged and 4 % were worse. We noted minor complications in 2/58 patients (3.4 %) and major complications in 2/58 patients (3.4 %). Conclusion Percutaneous sacroplasty for metastatic and osteoporotic fractures is a safe and effective technique in terms of pain relief and functional outcome. Key points • Percutaneous sacroplasty provides pain relief and functional improvement for insufficiency sacral fractures. • Percutaneous sacroplasty provides pain relief and function improvement for sacral tumours. • The major complication rate is acceptable (3.4 %), and is higher in sacral tumours. • Posterior wall/cortical sacral bone disruption is not statistically associated with more complications. • However, osteolytic tumours seem to be associated with higher risk of complications.

Introduction and hypothesis We investigated the efficiency and efficacy of vaginal mesh attachment using interrupted, non-barbed, delayed absorbable sutures in comparison with a running, barbed, delayed absorbable suture during laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC) and robotic sacrocolpopexy (RSC). Methods Women undergoing LSC or RSC were recruited. Participants were randomized to at least six 0 PDS non-barbed interrupted sutures or at least six passes of a 1 PDS barbed suture (Quill™) on each anterior and posterior polypropylene mesh leaflet. The primary outcome was the time to attach the mesh to the vagina. The LSC and RSC groups were block randomized by suture type. Secondary outcomes included: (1) intraoperative surgeon assessment of satisfaction as measured using a 10-cm visual analog scale (VAS), (2) postoperative POP-Q evaluation for anatomic failure, and (3) overall appearance of vaginal walls measured using a VAS. Results Of the 64 included subjects who were randomized, 32 had mesh attachment with the barbed suture (16 LSC, 16 RSC) and 32 had attachment with non-barbed sutures (16 LSC, 16 RSC). Among all the subjects (LSC and RSC), the non-barbed suture group had significantly longer mesh attachment times than the barbed suture group (42 vs. 29 min, p  < 0.001). The non-barbed suture group had significantly better scores for intraoperative ease of suture placement, surgeon satisfaction with mesh appearance, and global satisfaction. At 12 months, there were no significant differences in anatomic failure between the suture groups or overall appearance of the vaginal walls ( p  > 0.05). Conclusions The barbed suture technique was 11 – 16 min faster for attaching mesh to the vagina than the non-barbed suture technique. Anatomic outcomes at 12 months were comparable between the suture groups. It is reasonable to use a running, barbed suture in minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy.

Purpose Controversy persists as to whether to end multilevel thoracolumbar fusions caudally at L5 or S1. Some argue that stopping at L5 may preserve greater function, but there are few data comparing functional limitations due to lumbar stiffness in patients with fusion to L5 versus S1. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether patients undergoing multilevel thoracolumbar fusions with an L5 caudal endpoint have a better lumbosacral function than patients with an S1 caudal endpoint. Methods Patients undergoing successful thoracolumbar fusion of 5 or more levels to L5 or S1, with solid fusion at 2 year follow-up, were examined from a single European center in addition to a multi-center North American database of 237 patients. In total, 40 patients with a distal stopping point of L5 were matched with a subset of 40 patients with a distal endpoint of S1 ± pelvic fixation. The L5 and S1 groups were matched for the final Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Sagittal Vertical Axis (SVA C7-S1), number of fusion levels, and age. Impacts of lumbar stiffness on function as measured by the Lumbar Stiffness Disability Index (LSDI) were compared using the conditional logistic regression. Results After matching, there was no significant difference between the S1 and L5 groups for the final ODI (29.22 ± 21.6 for S1 versus 29.21 ± 21.7 for L5; p  = 0.98), SVA (29.5 ± 40.3 mm for S1 versus 33.7 ± 37.1 mm for L5; p  = 0.97), mean age (61.6 ± 11.0 years for S1 versus 58.3 ± 12.6 years for L5; p  = 0.23), and number of fusion levels (9.7 ± 3.3 levels for S1 versus 9.0 ± 3 levels for L5; p  = 0.34). The final 2-year postoperative LSDI scores were not significantly different between the S1 group (28.08 ± 21.47) and L5 group (29.21 ± 21.66) (hazard ratio 0.99, 95 % CI 0.97–1.03, p  = 0.81). Conclusion The analysis of patients with multilevel thoracolumbar fusions demonstrated that after minimum 2 year follow-up, self-reported functional impacts of lumbar stiffness were not significantly different between the patients with distal endpoints of L5 versus S1. The choice of distal fusion level of L5 does not appear to retain sufficient spinal flexibility to substantially affect postoperative function. Level of evidence Level III.

Introduction and hypothesis The high uterosacral vault suspension (HUVS) is a vaginal approach for treating apical prolapse that provides shorter operative and recovery times and is associated with lower morbidity rates. Success rates reported for this technique are comparable with the abdominal sacrocolpopexy (SCP); however, to date, there are no prospective randomized studies comparing HUVS to SCP. The aim of the study was to compare the anatomical objective cure rates for the apical compartment in patients undergoing either HUVS or SCP at 12 months’ follow-up. Methods We performed a single-center parallel randomized controlled trial in patients with severe apical defect defined as Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q) point C ≥ stage 3. Based on the center’s previous experience, a sample size of 124 patients was required to show a 20 % cure rate difference between both techniques with 80 % power and using a two-tailed 5 % level of significance. One hundred and ten patients were available for analysis; 54 were allocated to abdominal SCP and 56 to HUVS. The primary outcome was to evaluate surgical objective success defined as POP-Q point C  stage<2. The Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20), the Perceived Quality of Life Scale (P-QOL), and the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Function Questionnaire (PISQ-12) questionnaires were used for subjective assessment. Results The objective success rate for apical suspension at 12 months’ follow-up was 100 % for abdominal SCP and 82.5 % for HUVS (log-rank p 0.033). Both techniques showed a significant improvement with regards to prolapse symptoms, quality of life (QOL), and sexual function. The significant improvement in postoperative questionnaires was comparable between both surgeries at 12 months’ follow-up. Conclusions Abdominal SCP has statistically significant better anatomical results when compared with HUVS for correcting apical defects at 12 months.

Introduction and hypothesisThis study assessed the safety and efficacy of vaginal extraperitoneal uterosacral ligament suspension (VEULS) with anterior overlay mesh versus sacrocolpopexy (SCP) for posthysterectomy vault prolapse.MethodsThis was a multicenter randomized trial of women with posthysterectomy vault prolapse stage >2 according to the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q) system. Primary outcome was a composite of no vaginal bulge symptoms, no anatomical recurrence in the anterior or apical compartment at or beyond the hymenal ring, and no surgical retreatment for prolapse 12 months postsurgery. Secondary outcomes were peri- and postoperative complications, changes in prolapse, and urogenital and sexual symptoms at 12, 24, and 48 months based on the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI)-20.ResultsBetween 2006 and 2011, 82 eligible women were randomized: 39 received VEULS and 43 received SCP. Primary composite outcome at 12 months for success was 41% for VEULS and 65% for SCP [odds ratio (OR 2.68, p = 0.03)]. Perioperative complications were more common in the SCP group. C-point was higher for SCP (−6.0 VEULS vs −8.0 SCP, p = 0.005) and total vaginal length (TVL) was longer for SCP (8.0 VEULS vs 9.0 SCP, p = 0.05). Cumulative mesh exposure rate at 4 years was similar between the uterosacral [4/39 (10.3%)] and sacrocolpopexy [4/43 (9.3%)] groups, bearing in mind that not all patients were examined at 4 years. Subjective outcomes derived from three domains of the PFDI-20 were similar at 12, 24, 48 months. Postoperative Pelvic Organ Prolapse Distress Inventory (POPDI) score improved similarly for both groups at all timepoints, with the minimally important difference of at least 21 reached for both groups.ConclusionsComposite outcome of success was better for SCP at 12 months, but subjective outcomes for prolapse at all timepoints over 4 years for VEULS and SCP were not significantly different.