This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Letters to the Editor: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Letters to the Editor are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by LONSTEIN, J. E.
Right arrow Articles by WINTER, R. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by LONSTEIN, J. E.
Right arrow Articles by WINTER, R. B.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 81:1519-28 (1999)
© 1999 The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc.

Complications Associated with Pedicle Screws*

JOHN E. LONSTEIN, M.D.{dagger}, FRANCIS DENIS, M.D.{dagger}, JOSEPH H. PERRA, M.D.{dagger}, MANUEL R. PINTO, M.D.{dagger}, MICHAEL D. SMITH, M.D.{dagger} and ROBERT B. WINTER, M.D.{dagger}, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA

Investigation performed at the Twin Cities Spine Center, Minneapolis

Background: The safety and the effectiveness of pedicle-screw instrumentation in the spine have been questioned despite its use worldwide to enhance stabilization of the spine. This review was performed to answer questions about the technique of insertion and the nature and etiology of complications directly attributable to the screws. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of all of the pedicle-screw procedures that were done by us from January 1, 1984, to December 31, 1993. We inserted 4790 screws during 915 operative procedures on 875 patients; 668 (76.3 percent) of the patients had a lumbosacral arthrodesis. The mean duration of follow-up was three years (range, two to five years). The accuracy of screw placement was assessed on intraoperative, immediate postoperative, and follow-up radiographs with use of a technique that was developed by one of us (F. D.); this technique has yet to be validated to determine the prevalence of various types of error. Results: Of the 4790 screws, 4548 (94.9 percent) had been inserted within the pedicle and the vertebral body. One hundred and thirty-four (2.8 percent) of the screws had perforated the anterior cortex, and this was the most common type of perforation. One hundred and fifteen (2.4 percent) of the screws were associated with complications that could be ascribed to the use of pedicle screws. The most common problem was late-onset discomfort or pain related to a pseudarthrosis or perhaps to the screws; this problem was associated with 1102 (23.0 percent) of the screws, used in 222 (24.3 percent) of the procedures. The symptoms necessitated removal of the instrumentation with or without repair of the pseudarthrosis. A pseudarthrosis was found during forty-six (20.7 percent) of the 222 procedures. Irritation of a nerve root occurred after nine procedures (1.0 percent) and was caused by eleven screws (0.2 percent); it was more commonly caused by medially placed screws. Three patients had residual neurological weakness despite removal of the screws. Twenty-five screws (0.5 percent), used in twenty procedures (2.2 percent), broke. The screws that broke were of an early design. A pseudarthrosis was found in thirteen of twenty patients who had broken screws. Sixteen of the twenty patients had an exploration; three of them were found to have a solid fusion, and thirteen were found to have a pseudarthrosis. The remaining four patients had evidence of a solid fusion on radiographs and had no pain. Conclusions: There are few problems associated with the insertion of screws, provided that the surgeon is experienced and adheres to the principles and details of the operative technique. Our review revealed a low rate of postoperative complications related to pedicle screws. The problem of late-onset pain may be related to the implants or to the stiffness of the construct; however, it is difficult to accurately identify its exact etiology.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 RadioGraphicsHome page
P. M. Young, T. H. Berquist, L. W. Bancroft, and J. J. Peterson
Complications of Spinal Instrumentation
RadioGraphics, May 1, 2007; 27(3): 775 - 789.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JBJSHome page
D. A. Bednar, T. A. Einhorn, and P. C. McAfee
Postoperative Pain in Research Animals, and Use of Interbody Fusion Cages
J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., February 1, 2001; 83(2): 293-b - 293.
[Full Text]