Hardware complications in scoliosis surgery

Bagchi, Kaushik; Mohaideen, Ahamed; Thomson, Jeffrey D.; Foley, Christopher L.

doi:10.1007/s00247-002-0659-x

Cited by 23 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…MRI is sensitive for detecting fractures, pseudo-arthrosis, and infections. It depicts cancellous bone marrow well compared to cortical bone [37] . Metallic hardware-induced MR susceptibility artifacts are mainly the sum of local field inhomogeneities (due to spin resonance differences between metal and surrounding soft-tissues) altering both phase and frequency of local spins.…”

Section: Magnetic Resonance Imagingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Baseline radiographs or CR images are essential for evaluating spinal construct position ( Figure 5) and serve as a starting point for evaluation of future studies, should patients develop symptoms suggesting potential complications. A change in position or instrument failure is often easily appreciated on serial radiographs or CR images [6,37] . Antero-posterior (AP), lateral, oblique, and motion studies (flexion, extension, or lateral bending) images are usually adequate and varies from one institution to another.…”

Section: Imaging Modalitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Improper selection of implants may be the cause of failure, as the chosen construct may not withstand the physiologic loads imparted on it for a given patient and clinical scenario. Patients noncompliant with postoperative spinal precautions (avoiding heavy lifting, excessive bending or twisting of the trunk, or exposure to high impact activities) are liable to have their implants fail [37] . Trauma is a common cause of immediate hardware failure [6,7,37] .…”

Section: Spinal Hardware-related Complicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Any factor that retards fusion will subject the implant to abnormally high loads for longer periods and ultimately fail when it exceeds its loading capabilities [3,4,6,7,9,18,37] . Improper selection of implants may be the cause of failure, as the chosen construct may not withstand the physiologic loads imparted on it for a given patient and clinical scenario.…”

Section: Spinal Hardware-related Complicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Radiography is the mainstay used for the postoperative imaging of spinal fusion thanks to its wide availability, cost-effectiveness, and non-invasive nature, although computed tomography (CT) is reported to be a more accurate modality [6,36,37] . Baseline radiographs or CR images are essential for evaluating spinal construct position ( Figure 5) and serve as a starting point for evaluation of future studies, should patients develop symptoms suggesting potential complications.…”

Section: Imaging Modalitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Spinal fusion-hardware construct: Basic concepts and imaging review

Nouh¹

2012

WJR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The interpretation of spinal images fixed with metallic hardware forms an increasing bulk of daily practice in a bus�� imaging department. Radio�ogists are required to be familiar with the instrumentation and operative options used in spinal fixation and fusion procedures, especia�� in his or her institute. This is critica� in eva�uat-ing the position of imp�ants and potentia� comp�ications associated with the operative approaches and spinal fixation devices used. Thus, the radiologist can play an important role in patient care and outcome. This review out�ines the advantages and disadvantages of common�� used imaging methods and reports on the best yield for each modality and how to overcome the problematic issues associated with the presence of metallic hardware during imaging. Baseline radiographs are essentia� as the�� are the base�ine point for eva�uation of future studies shou�d patients deve�op s��mptoms suggesting possib�e comp�ications. The�� ma�� justif�� further imaging workup with computed tomography, magnetic resonance and/or nuc�ear medicine studies as the eva�u-ation of a patient with a spinal implant involves a multimodality approach. This review describes imaging features of potential complications associated with spinal fusion surgery as well as the instrumentation used. This basic knowledge aims to help radiologists approach ever��da�� practice in c�inica� imaging.

show abstract

Section: Magnetic Resonance Imagingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Imaging Modalitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Spinal Hardware-related Complicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Spinal Hardware-related Complicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Imaging Modalitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Spinal fusion-hardware construct: Basic concepts and imaging review

Nouh¹

2012

WJR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Preliminary experience with SpineEOS, a new software for 3D planning in AIS surgery

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this preliminary study, the software based on 3D stereoradiography low-dose system used to plan AIS surgery seems reliable for preoperative planning and precontoured rods. It is an interesting tool to improve surgeons' practice, since 3D planning is expected to reduce complications such as iatrogenic malalignment and to help for a better understanding of the complications, choosing the location of the transitional vertebra. However, further work is needed to improve thoracic kyphosis planning. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

show abstract

Influence of perioperative complication severity on 1- and 2-year outcomes of low back surgery

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundSeveral factors potentially influence outcomes of surgery, including perioperative complications. Complications may take many forms and the Clavien–Dindo (CD) classification is designed to categorize them by degree of severity. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of perioperative complications by severity categorization on the 1-and 2-year pain and disability outcomes for patients who received low back surgery.Materials and methodsData used for the study involved a purposive sample (N = 477; 8.1%) from a spine outcomes registry of 5876 patients who received spine surgery and encountered complications. All complications were categorized using the CD classification and were collapsed according to distribution frequencies, i.e., Grade I–II and Grade III–V. Adjusted and unadjusted regression analyses were used to determine the association between CD classification and 1- and 2-year outcomes.ResultsThe majority of surgical complications were Grade III−V (N = 358; 75.1%), with two incidences in which death occurred. For the unadjusted models, there were no significant associations between CD classification categorizations for 1-year outcomes; however, 2-year outcomes were significantly worse (P <0.05) for those with Grade III–V categorization. When adjusted and controlled for baseline characteristics, CD classification did not influence 1-or 2-year pain and disability outcomes.ConclusionsWhen control variables are considered, the severity of perioperative surgical complications does not appear to influence 1- or 2-year pain and disability outcomes.Level of evidenceLevel 4.

show abstract

Hardware complications in scoliosis surgery

Abstract: Spine surgeons and radiologists should be familiar with the different types of instrumentation in the treatment of scoliosis. Furthermore, they should recognize the clinical and roentgenographic signs of hardware failure as part of prompt and effective treatment of such complications.

Cited by 23 publications

References 34 publications

Spinal fusion-hardware construct: Basic concepts and imaging review

Spinal fusion-hardware construct: Basic concepts and imaging review

Preliminary experience with SpineEOS, a new software for 3D planning in AIS surgery

Influence of perioperative complication severity on 1- and 2-year outcomes of low back surgery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About