Advertisement

Reconstructive Procedures in the Osteoporotic Patient

  • Jacob Januszewski
  • Juan S. Uribe
Chapter

Abstract

In this chapter we discuss options to improve cortical bone instrumentation purchase in reconstructive surgery of the cervical spine and promote arthrodesis in an osteoporotic patient. However, all current evidence begins to point toward avoidance of operating on an osteoporotic patient until bone mineral density is improved enough to better accommodate instrumentation without the risk of failure, non-union, or pseudoarthrosis. A short guideline for preoperative workup and management of an osteoporotic patient is suggested. This is followed by a short discussion of reconstructive techniques available for patients with osteoporosis as well as their postoperative care.

Keywords

Reconstructive procedures Bone mineral density Osteoporosis Osteopenia Osteoporotic patient 

References

  1. 1.
    Kanis JA, McCloskey EV, Johansson H, et al. A reference standard for the description of osteoporosis. Bone. 2008;42:467–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Steinmetz MP, Benzel EC. Benzel’s spine surgery: techniques, complication avoidance, and management. 4th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier; 2016.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Siris ES, Chen YT, Abbott TA, et al. Bone mineral density thresholds for pharmacological intervention to prevent fractures. Arch Intern Med. 2004;164:1108–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cosman F, de Beur SJ, LeBoff MS, et al. Clinician's guide to prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int. 2014;25:2359–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Crandall CJ, Newberry SJ, Diamant A, et al. Comparative effectiveness of pharmacologic treatments to prevent fractures: an updated systematic review. Ann Intern Med. 2014;161:711–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kim DK, Kim JY, Kim DY, et al. Risk factors of proximal junctional kyphosis after multilevel fusion surgery: more than 2 years follow-up data. J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2017;60:174–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Liu FY, Wang T, Yang SD, et al. Incidence and risk factors for proximal junctional kyphosis: a meta-analysis. European spine J. 2016;25:2376–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Park SJ, Lee CS, Chung SS, et al. Different risk factors of proximal junctional kyphosis and proximal junctional failure following long instrumented fusion to the sacrum for adult spinal deformity: survivorship analysis of 160 patients. Neurosurgery. 2017;80:279–86.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Yagi M, King AB, Boachie-Adjei O. Incidence, risk factors, and natural course of proximal junctional kyphosis: surgical outcomes review of adult idiopathic scoliosis. Minimum 5 years of follow-up. Spine. 2012;37:1479–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yagi M, Rahm M, Gaines R, et al. Characterization and surgical outcomes of proximal junctional failure in surgically treated patients with adult spinal deformity. Spine. 2014;39:E607–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mauck KF, Clarke BL. Diagnosis, screening, prevention, and treatment of osteoporosis. Mayo Clin Proc. 2006;81:662–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    El Maghraoui A, Roux C. DXA scanning in clinical practice. QJM. 2008;101:605–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nelson HD, Haney EM, Chou R, et al. U.S. preventive services task force evidence syntheses, formerly systematic evidence reviews. Screening for osteoporosis: systematic review to update the 2002 U.S. preventive services task force recommendation. Rockville: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2010.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cranney A, Tugwell P, Adachi J, et al. Meta-analyses of therapies for postmenopausal osteoporosis. III. Meta-analysis of risedronate for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. Endocr Rev. 2002;23:517–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kanis JA, Borgstrom F, Johnell O, et al. Cost-effectiveness of risedronate for the treatment of osteoporosis and prevention of fractures in postmenopausal women. Osteoporos Int. 2004;15:862–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bone HG, Chapurlat R, Brandi ML, et al. The effect of three or six years of denosumab exposure in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis: results from the FREEDOM extension. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2013;98:4483–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cummings SR, San Martin J, McClung MR, et al. Denosumab for prevention of fractures in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. N Engl J Med. 2009;361:756–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chen F, Dai Z, Kang Y, et al. Effects of zoledronic acid on bone fusion in osteoporotic patients after lumbar fusion. Osteoporos Int. 2016;27:1469–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Schilcher J, Koeppen V, Aspenberg P, et al. Risk of atypical femoral fracture during and after bisphosphonate use. N Engl J Med. 2014;371:974–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Neer RM, Arnaud CD, Zanchetta JR, et al. Effect of parathyroid hormone (1-34) on fractures and bone mineral density in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. N Engl J Med. 2001;344:1434–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ebata S, Takahashi J, Hasegawa T, et al. Role of weekly Teriparatide Administration in Osseous Union Enhancement within six months after posterior or Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for osteoporosis-associated lumbar degenerative disorders: a multicenter, prospective randomized study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2017;99:365–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kaliya-Perumal AK, Lu ML, Luo CA, et al. Retrospective radiological outcome analysis following teriparatide use in elderly patients undergoing multilevel instrumented lumbar fusion surgery. Medicine (Baltimore). 2017;96:e5996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Cho PG, Ji GY, Shin DA, et al. An effect comparison of teriparatide and bisphosphonate on posterior lumbar interbody fusion in patients with osteoporosis: a prospective cohort study and preliminary data. European spine J. 2017;26:691–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Seki S, Hirano N, Kawaguchi Y, et al. Teriparatide versus low-dose bisphosphonates before and after surgery for adult spinal deformity in female Japanese patients with osteoporosis. Eur Spine J. 2017;26:2121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Chaudhary N, Lee JS, Wu JY, et al. Evidence for use of Teriparatide in spinal fusion surgery in osteoporotic patients. World Neurosurg. 2017;100:551–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fischer CR, Hanson G, Eller M, et al. A systematic review of treatment strategies for degenerative lumbar spine fusion surgery in patients with osteoporosis. Geriatr Orthop Surg Rehabil. 2016;7:188–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Cho SK, Bridwell KH, Lenke LG, et al. Major complications in revision adult deformity surgery: risk factors and clinical outcomes with 2- to 7-year follow-up. Spine. 2012;37:489–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Brodke DS, Bachus KN, Mohr RA, et al. Segmental pedicle screw fixation or cross-links in multilevel lumbar constructs. A biomechanical analysis. Spine J. 2001;1:373–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Mattei TA, Rehman AA, Issawi A, et al. Surgical challenges in the management of cervical kyphotic deformity in patients with severe osteoporosis: an illustrative case of a patient with Hajdu-Cheney syndrome. Eur Spine J. 2015;24:2746–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Dick JC, Zdeblick TA, Bartel BD, et al. Mechanical evaluation of cross-link designs in rigid pedicle screw systems. Spine. 1997;22:370–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Chen LH, Tai CL, Lee DM, et al. Pullout strength of pedicle screws with cement augmentation in severe osteoporosis: a comparative study between cannulated screws with cement injection and solid screws with cement pre-filling. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2011;12:33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Divi SN, Mikhael MM. Use of allogenic mesenchymal cellular bone matrix in anterior and posterior cervical spinal fusion: a case series of 21 patients. Asian spine J. 2017;11:454–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Hansraj KK. Stem Cells in Spine Surgery. Surg Technol Int. 2016;XXIX:348–58.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ames CP, Smith JS, Scheer JK, et al. Impact of spinopelvic alignment on decision making in deformity surgery in adults: a review. J Neurosurg Spine. 2012;16:547–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hasegawa K, Okamoto M, Hatsushikano S, et al. Normative values of spino-pelvic sagittal alignment, balance, age, and health-related quality of life in a cohort of healthy adult subjects. Eur Spine J. 2016;25:3675–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Lafage R, Schwab F, Challier V, et al. Defining Spino-pelvic alignment thresholds: should operative goals in adult spinal deformity surgery account for age? Spine. 2016;41:62–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Maciejczak A, Jablonska-Sudol K. Correlation between correction of pelvic balance and clinical outcomes in mid- and low-grade adult isthmic spondylolisthesis. Eur Spine J. 2016;26(12):3112–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Yagi M, Kaneko S, Yato Y, et al. Standing balance and compensatory mechanisms in patients with adult spinal deformity. Spine. 2016;42(10):E584–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jacob Januszewski
    • 1
  • Juan S. Uribe
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Neurosurgery and Brain RepairUniversity of South FloridaTampaUSA

Personalised recommendations