↓ Skip to main content

Pedicle subtraction osteotomy in the lumbar spine: indications, technical aspects, results and complications

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology, May 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
57 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
68 Mendeley
Title
Pedicle subtraction osteotomy in the lumbar spine: indications, technical aspects, results and complications
Published in
European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology, May 2014
DOI 10.1007/s00590-014-1470-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cedric Barrey, Gilles Perrin, Frederic Michel, Jean-Marc Vital, Ibrahim Obeid

Abstract

Pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO) consists of creating posteriorly trapezoidal shape of a vertebra, usually L3 or L4, in order to recreate lordosis in the lumbar spine. It is usually indicated to treat rigid kyphotic lumbar spine associated with sagittal imbalance and due to degenerative changes or to iatrogenic flat back. PSO is technically demanding with high rates of complications and should be performed by experienced teams. We presently report our experience about PSO performed in the lumbar spine (below L1) through a series of 25 cases with a special focus on technical aspects and complications associated with the surgical procedure. Mean age was 64 ± 11 years old. PSO was performed at L4 in the majority of cases. Mean blood loss was 1,070 ± 470 ml, and mean duration of the surgery was 241 ± 44 min. VAS decreased from 7.5 ± 2 preoperatively to 3.2 ± 2.5 at 1 year, and ODI decreased from 64 ± 12 preoperatively to 32 ± 18 at 1 year, p < 0.05. Mean gain of lordosis after PSO varies from 20° to 40° and was measured to 27° ± 10° on average. Lumbar lordosis (T12-S1) was measured to 21° ± 10° preoperatively to 50° ± 11° postoperatively at 1 year, p < 0.05. A total of five major complications (20 %) were observed (two mechanical, one neurological and two infections) necessitating five reoperations. In conclusion, PSO was highly efficient to restore lumbar lordosis and correct sagittal imbalance. It was associated with a non-negligible, but acceptable rate of complications. To limit the risk of mechanical complications, we recommend fusing the adjacent disks whatever the approach (PLIF/TLIF/XLIF). Most complications can be reduced with adequate environment, informed anesthesiologists and experienced surgical team.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
Denmark 1 1%
Unknown 65 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 24%
Other 8 12%
Student > Master 8 12%
Student > Bachelor 7 10%
Lecturer 3 4%
Other 14 21%
Unknown 12 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 42 62%
Engineering 4 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Neuroscience 2 3%
Social Sciences 1 1%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 14 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 May 2014.
All research outputs
#20,229,658
of 22,755,127 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology
#538
of 873 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#193,317
of 227,501 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology
#16
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,755,127 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 873 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 227,501 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.