Pseudarthrosis following lumbar and lumbosacral fusion using the antepsoas technique
Spine, ISSN: 1528-1159, Vol: 46, Issue: 24, Page: 1690-1695
2021
- 5Citations
- 9Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations5
- Citation Indexes5
- CrossRef3
- Captures9
- Readers9
Article Description
Study Design. Retrospective case–control study. Objective. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of pseudarthrosis following antepsoas (ATP) lumbar and lumbosacral fusions. Summary of Background Data. Pseudarthrosis is a feared complication following spinal fusions and may affect their clinical outcomes. To date there are no sufficient data on the fusion rate following ATP lumbar and lumbosacral arthrodesis. Methods. This is a retrospective review of 220 patients who underwent lumbar minimally invasive antepsoas (MIS-ATP) fusions between January 2008 and February 2019 who have at least 1-year postoperative computed tomography (CT) follow-up scans. Fusion was graded using CT scans imaging and adopting a 1–4 grading scale (1, definitely fused; 2, likely fused; 3, likely not fused; 4, definitely not fused/nonunion). Grades 3 or 4 indicate pseudarthrosis. Results. A total of 220 patients (average age: 66years, 82 males (37.2%), and 127 (57.7%) smokers) were included. Eight patients (3.6%) developed pseudarthrosis. A total of 693 discs were addressed using the ATP approach. Of those, 681 (98.3%) were considered fused (641 levels [92.5%] were ‘‘definitely fused’’ and 40 levels [5.8%] were ‘‘Likely fused’’) and 12 discs (1.7%) developed pseudarthrosis (seven levels [1.0%] were ‘‘likely not fused’’ and five levels (0.7%) were ‘‘definitely not fused’’). The highest rate of pseudarthrosis was found at L5-S1 (4.8%) compared to the L1-L5 discs (0–2%). Of 127 smokers, six developed pseudarthrosis (odds ratio ¼ 2.3, P¼0.3). The fusion rates were 95.3% and 97.8% for smokers and nonsmokers, respectively. Of the eight patients who developed pseudarthrosis, only four (50%) were symptomatic, of whom two (25%) required revision surgery. Both of these patients were smokers. The overall revision rate due to pseudarthrosis was 0.9% (two of 220 patients). Conclusion. The MIS-ATP technique results in a high fusion rate (96.4% of patients; 98.3% of levels). Pseudarthrosis was noted mostly at the L5-S1 discs and in smokers.
Bibliographic Details
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know