Minimally invasive internal fixator for unstable pelvic ring injuries with a pedicle screw–rod system: a retrospective study of 23 patients after 13.5 months
- 84 Downloads
Pelvic ring fractures are challenging injuries and require effective treatment due to the frequently compromised patient condition. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of unstable pelvic ring injuries treated with a minimally invasive pedicle screw–rod system.
Retrospective analysis was performed for patients with an unstable pelvic ring injury that were treated with a minimally invasive anterior internal pelvic fixator (INFIX) with or without a posterior pedicle screw–rod fixator (6/2012–4/2015). The quality of reduction was evaluated by the Tornetta and Matta criteria and the clinical outcome was evaluated by the Majeed scores. Further evaluation included the operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and complication rate.
A total of 23 patients (12 males and 11 females) with a mean age of 37.6 years (range 10–65 years) and a follow-up of 13.5 months (6–27 months) were evaluated. The Tile classification showed 13 type B (B1 = 6, B2 = 4, and B3 = 3) and 10 type C (C1 = 7 and C2 = 3) fractures. Mean operation time and intraoperative blood loss were 24.8 min (20–30 min) and 20.4 ml (16–29 ml) for an anterior INFIX (n = 13), and 60 min (45–70 min) and 150 ml (115–168 ml) when combined with a posterior pedicle screw–rod fixator (n = 10). Quality of reduction was excellent in 13, good in 6, and fair in 4 patients, with no signs of heterotopic ossification. Clinical results after 6 months were excellent in 14 patients, good in 6, fair in 2, and poor in 1. Unilateral thigh paresthesia was seen in 2 patients which resolved after implant removal.
The INFIX appears to be a safe and minimally invasive surgical technique which can effectively be combined with posterior pedicle screw–rod fixation. It also can be applied for the definitive treatment of vertically and/or rotationally unstable pelvic ring injuries, especially in severely compromised patients with a high mortality risk.
KeywordsINFIX Pelvic ring injury Internal fixator Minimally invasive Pedicle screw–rod
There was no funding source.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
The retrospective study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the local University and performed according to the Declaration of Helsinki.
- 2.Kellam JF (1989) The role of external fixation in pelvic disruptions. Clin Orthop Relat Res (241):66–82Google Scholar
- 9.Vigdorchik JM, Esquivel AO, Jin X, Yang KH, Onwudiwe NA, Vaidya R (2012) Biomechanical stability of a supra-acetabular pedicle screw internal fixation device (INFIX) vs external fixation and plates for vertically unstable pelvic fractures. J Orthop Surg Res 7:31. https://doi.org/10.1186/1749-799x-7-31 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.Hoskins W, Bucknill A, Wong J, Britton E, Judson R, Gumm K, Santos R, Sheehy R, Griffin X (2016) A prospective case series for a minimally invasive internal fixation device for anterior pelvic ring fractures. J Orthop Surg Res 11(1):135. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-016-0468-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.Bi C, Wang Q, Nagelli C, Wu J, Wang Q, Wang J (2016) Treatment of unstable posterior pelvic ring fracture with pedicle screw-rod fixator versus locking compression plate: a comparative study. Med Sci Monit Int Med J Exp Clin Res 22:3764–3770Google Scholar
- 24.Saiki K, Hirabayashi S, Horie T, Tsuzuki N, Inokuchi K, Tsutsumi H (2002) Anatomically correct reduction and fixation of a Tile C-1 type unilateral sacroiliac disruption using a rod and pedicle screw system between the S1 vertebra and the ilium: experimental and clinical case report. J Orthop Sci Off J Jpn Orthop Assoc 7(5):581–586. https://doi.org/10.1007/s007760200104 Google Scholar