Sacroiliac Joint Fusion: Fusion Rates and Clinical Improvement Using Minimally Invasive Approach and Intraoperative Navigation and Robotic Guidance (original) (raw)
Related papers
The International Journal of Spine Surgery, 2023
Background: Sacroiliac (SI) joint fusion is increasingly used to treat chronic SI joint pain. Multiple surgical approaches are now available. Methods: Data abstraction and random effects meta-analysis of safety and efficacy outcomes from published patient cohorts. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and safety measures were stratified by surgical technique: transiliac, including lateral transiliac (LTI) and posterolateral transiliac (PLTI), and posterior interpositional (PI) procedures. Results: Fifty-seven cohorts of 2851 patients were identified, including 43 cohorts (2126 patients) for LTI, 6 cohorts (228 patients) for PLTI, and 8 cohorts (497 patients) for PI procedures. Randomized trials were only available for LTI. PROs were available for pain (numeric rating scale) in 57 cohorts (2851 patients) and disability (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI]) in 37 cohorts (1978 patients). All studies with PROs showed improvement from baseline after surgery. Meta-analytic improvements in pain scores were highest for LTI (4.8 points [0-10 scale]), slightly lower for PLTI (4.2 points), and lowest for PI procedures (3.8 points, P = 0.1533). Mean improvements in ODI scores were highest for LTI (25.9 points), lowest for PLTI procedures (6.8 points), and intermediate for PI (16.3 points, P = 0.0095). For safety outcomes, acute symptomatic implant malposition was 0.43% for LTI, 0% for PLTI, and 0.2% for PI procedures. Wound infection was reported in 0.15% of LTI, 0% of PLTI, and 0% of PI procedures. Bleeding requiring surgical intervention was reported in 0.04% of LTI procedures and not reported for PLTI or PI. Breakage and migration were not reported for any device. Radiographic imaging evaluation reporting implant placement accuracy and fusion was only available for LTI. Discussion: Literature support for SI joint fusion is growing. The LTI procedure contains the largest body of available evidence and shows the largest improvements in pain and ODI. Only LTI procedures have independent radiographic evidence of fusion and implant placement. The adverse event rate for all procedures was low. Level of Evidence: 1.
Neurosurgical Focus
OBJECTIVE Sacroiliac joint (SIJ) dysfunction is a significant cause of back pain. Despite recent advances in minimally invasive (MIS) SIJ fusion, the fusion rate remains controversial. This study sought to demonstrate that a navigated decortication and direct arthrodesis technique in MIS SIJ fusion would result in satisfactory fusion rates and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). METHODS The authors retrospectively reviewed consecutive patients who underwent MIS SIJ fusion from 2018 to 2021. SIJ fusion was performed using cylindrical threaded implants and SIJ decortication employing the O-arm surgical imaging system and StealthStation. The primary outcome was fusion, evaluated using CT at 6, 9, and 12 months postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included revision surgery, time to revision surgery, visual analog scale (VAS) score for back pain, and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), measured preoperatively and 6 and 12 months postoperatively. Patient demographics and perioperative data ...
Research Article Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Joint Fusion: One-Year Outcomes in 40 Patients
2016
Copyright © 2013 D. Sachs and R. Capobianco.This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Background. SI joint pain is difficult to diagnose due to overlapping symptoms of the lumbar spine, and until recently, treatment options have been limited. The purpose of this retrospective study is to report on the safety and effectiveness of MIS SI joint arthrodesis using a series of triangular, porous plasma coated implants in patients refractory to conservative care. Methods. We report on the first 40 consecutive patients with one-year follow-up data that underwent MIS SI joint fusion with the iFuse Implant System (SI-BONE, Inc., San Jose, CA) by a single surgeon. Medical charts were reviewed for demographics, perioperative metrics, complications, pain scores, and satisfaction. Results. Mean age was 58 years (range 30–81) a...
Patient Reported Outcomes from Sacroiliac Joint Fusion
Asian Spine Journal
Study DesignRetrospective, case series.PurposeThe purpose of this study is to determine morbidity, complications, and patient reported outcomes from minimally invasive sacroiliac joint (SIJ) fusion.Overview of LiteratureLumbar back pain emanating from the SIJ can be surgically treated via a percutaneous approach in the appropriately selected patient with minimal morbidity and acceptable functional outcomes.MethodsPatients diagnosed by >2 physical examination maneuvers and subjective relief from a computed tomography–guided lidocaine-bupivacaine-steroid injection underwent SIJ fusion after failing conservative management with a combination of oral anti-inflammatory medications, physical therapy, and pelvic belt stabilization. Perioperative data collected include estimated blood loss (EBL) and operative time. Oswestry disability index, 12-item short form health survey (SF-12), visual analogue score, and functional status were analyzed. All complications were noted.ResultsThe study ...
Cureus, 2021
The sacroiliac joint (SIJ) is estimated to be a source of pain in 15%-30% of patients presenting for the evaluation of low back pain. The SIJ may develop symptoms in an estimated 43% of patients who have had previous lumbar fusion surgeries. With increased awareness of SIJ as a pain source and for those patients who have intractable pain and who fail nonoperative treatment, surgery to stabilize the SIJ is becoming more common. Thus multiple different technologies and techniques need to be evaluated. The purpose of this study is to report on the clinical and radiographic follow-up of percutaneous lateral-oblique sacroiliac joint fusion with a threaded compression screw performed in an outpatient ambulatory surgery center (ASC). Methods Three consecutive patients were chosen for this technique, and after completion, were followed for at least 24 months as part of a pilot study to see how they responded to the treatment. The medical charts of these patients were reviewed along with follow-up radiographs and computed tomography (CT) scans to assess for radiographic fusion designated as bridging bone across the SIJ with no signs of implant loosening such as haloes around the screws, change in position, or screw breakage. The SacroFuse (Sacrix LLC, Boston, MA) SIJ screws were 12 mm x 60 mm at S1 and 12 mm x 50 mm at S2 with threads for compressive fixation and cannulated for percutaneous placement over a guidewire. We evaluated patients' demographics, the pain visual analog scale (VAS) score, and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) preoperatively and postoperatively. Results Our first patient was a 51-year-old male body mass index (BMI) 33.3 kg/m 2 with a previous lumbar fusion. He underwent a two-staged SIJ fusion. The first surgery was done as an open direct lateral surgery, and the second stage was performed three months later using a direct percutaneous lateral-oblique technique for three months. The second and third patients, respectively, were 22-year-old female status prior L5-S1 anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) plus right posterior unilateral pedicle screws. She had a BMI of 38.3 kg/m 2. The third patient was a 41-year-old male with a BMI of 29.5 kg/m 2 who underwent lateral-oblique bilateral percutaneous SIJ fixation. The latest CT imaging of each patient demonstrated increased bone density adjacent and within implants with intra-articular osseous bridging. There were no implant failures or complications. Conclusion This pilot study demonstrated the feasibility and effectiveness of a new percutaneous lateral-oblique SIJ fusion technique with a threaded compression screw done safely in an ASC. Patients demonstrated early pain relief and long-term fusion of their SIJ. We introduced the Sacrix line as a key fluoroscopic landmark for the success of this percutaneous technique.
The Open Orthopaedics Journal, 2014
Introduction: The sacroiliac joint (SIJ) may be a source of chronic low back pain in 15 -22% of patients. Over the past four years MIS is an emerging standard of care for SI joint fusion. The International Society for the Advancement of Spine Surgery (ISASS) and Society for Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery (SMISS) conducted a survey of their members to examine current preferences in surgeon practice of MIS SI fusion. Methods: To qualify for survey participation, the surgeon had to perform at least one open or MIS SIJ fusion procedure between 2009 and 2012. All surgeons were instructed to review their records. This included the number of surgical procedures performed annually from 2009-2012, site of service where each procedure was commonly performed, and average length of stay for each approach. Results: Twenty four percent (121/500) of the eligible members participated in this survey. This survey revealed that the percentage of MIS procedures increased from 39% in 2009 to over 87% in 2012. The survey showed a significant increase in average number of MIS surgeries and a significant difference between open and MIS surgeries in 2012 (p<0.0001). In addition, 80% of the survey respondents indicated a lack of preference toward open approach if that was the only available option. Conclusion: According to performed survey, MIS SIJ fusion is preferred over open technique. Incorporation of the MIS technique into the spine surgeon's specter of skills would allow an increased number of surgical options as well as possible increase in outcome quality.
Minimally invasive versus open sacroiliac joint fusion: are they similarly safe and effective?
Clinical orthopaedics and related research, 2014
The sacroiliac joint has been implicated as a source of chronic low back pain in 15% to 30% of patients. When nonsurgical approaches fail, sacroiliac joint fusion may be recommended. Advances in intraoperative image guidance have assisted minimally invasive surgical (MIS) techniques using ingrowth-coated fusion rods; however, how these techniques perform relative to open anterior fusion of the sacroiliac joint using plates and screws is not known. We compared estimated blood loss (EBL), surgical time, length of hospital stay (LOS), and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) between patients undergoing MIS and open sacroiliac joint fusion. We retrospectively studied 63 patients (open: 36; MIS: 27) who underwent sacroiliac joint fusion with minimum 1-year followup at our institution from 2006 to 2011. Of those, 10 in the open group had incomplete records. All patients had sacroiliac joint dysfunction confirmed by image-guided intraarticular anesthetic sacroiliac joint injection and had faile...
European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2016
To compare the safety and effectiveness of minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion (SIJF) using triangular titanium implants vs conservative management (CM) in patients with chronic sacroiliac joint (SIJ) pain. 103 adults with chronic SIJ pain at nine sites in four European countries were randomly assigned to and underwent either minimally invasive SIJF using triangular titanium implants (N = 52) or CM (N = 51). CM was performed according to the European guidelines for the diagnosis and management of pelvic girdle pain and consisted of optimization of medical therapy, individualized physical therapy (PT) and adequate information and reassurance as part of a multifactorial treatment. The primary outcome was the difference in change in self-rated low back pain (LBP) at 6 months. Additional endpoints included quality of life using EQ-5D-3L, disability using Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), SIJ function using active straight leg raise (ASLR) test and adverse events. NCT01741025. At 6...