Comparison of Minimally Invasive Versus Open Spinopelvic Fixation for Unstable Sacral Fractures
Comparison of Minimally Invasive Versus Open Spinopelvic Fixation for Unstable Sacral Fractures
The aim of this retrospective study is to evaluate patients with vertically unstable high-energy sacral fracture operated on at our institution with spinopelvic fixation, to compare the traditionally open method of fixation with the minimally invasive fixation. The aim of the research is to determine whether minimally invasive surgical techniques can achieve comparable fracture reduction and functional outcome as open surgical approaches. Another aim is to determine whether the minimally invasive surgical procedure leads to shorter patient hospitalization, lower perioperative blood loss, and lower postoperative complications.
This retrospective study included 51 patients with vertically unstable sacral fracture operated at our institution with open or minimally invasive spinopelvic fixation over a period of 11 years (2014-2024). The patients were divided into two groups. One group of patients underwent open spinopelvic fixation, the other group underwent minimally invasive spinopelvic fixation. Each patient underwent a CT scan before and after surgery. The degree of fracture dislocation and reduction was measured in three planes at each examination. The degree of reduction was divided into four groups according to residual dislocation. In the perioperative period, blood loss, the length of the surgical procedure from the first incision to the suture of the wounds, and radiation exposure were monitored. Intraoperative blood loss was calculated from the waste in the surgical suction system. Functional outcome was assessed one year after surgery. A standardized questionnaire according to the Majeed score was used to assess functional outcome.
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria: