Revision surgery after pso failure with rod breakage: A comparison of different techniques

A. Luca, A. Lovi, M. Brayda-Bruno, F. Galbusera

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Conclusion The efficacy of PSO should be balanced with the high risk of the procedure reported in the literature. Management of revision surgery after PSO may require the addition of anterior column support to maintain correction and reduce complications.

Summary of background data The complication rate of pedicle subtraction osteotomy is substantially higher than other corrective procedures available for the treatment of spinal sagittal imbalance: in particular, hardware failures and mechanical complications affect this technique and their biomechanical explanation is still purely speculative.

Study design Author experience and literature review. Objectives To compare different revision techniques in the treatment of implant failure after pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO).

Methods The author’s experience and the literature regarding the revision techniques for PSO failures are discussed.

Results In this paper, eight consecutive revision cases due to rod breakage after PSO surgery are reported. In our experience, the main goals are to restore the spinal balance, through a posterior approach (correction and hardware revision and implementation) and to get a solid anterior fusion (both through a traditional anterior approach or minimally invasive transpsoas approach).

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)S610-S615
JournalEuropean Spine Journal
Volume23
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Nov 1 2014

Keywords

  • Failure
  • Pedicle subtraction osteotomy
  • Sagittal imbalance

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
  • Medicine(all)

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Revision surgery after pso failure with rod breakage: A comparison of different techniques'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this