1.Etiology, Evaluation, and Treatment of Failed Back Surgery Syndrome
Amer SEBAALY ; Marie José LAHOUD ; Maroun RIZKALLAH ; Gaby KREICHATI ; Khalil KHARRAT
Asian Spine Journal 2018;12(3):574-585
The study aimed to review the etiology of failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) and to propose a treatment algorithm based on a systematic review of the current literature and individual experience. FBSS is a term that groups the conditions with recurring low back pain after spine surgery with or without a radicular component. Since the information on FBSS incidence is limited, data needs to be retrieved from old studies. It is generally accepted that its incidence ranges between 10% and 40% after lumbar laminectomy with or without fusion. Although the etiology of FBSS is not completely understood, it is possibly multifactorial, and the causative factors may be categorized into preoperative, operative, and postoperative factors. The evaluation of patients with FBSS symptoms should ideally initiate with reviewing the patients' clinical history (observing “red flags”), followed by a detailed clinical examination and imaging (whole-body X-ray, magnetic resonance imaging, and computed tomography). FBSS is a complex and difficult pathology, and its accurate diagnosis is of utmost importance. Its management should be multidisciplinary, and special attention should be provided to cases of recurrent disc herniation and postoperative spinal imbalance.
Diagnosis
;
Failed Back Surgery Syndrome
;
Humans
;
Incidence
;
Laminectomy
;
Low Back Pain
;
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
;
Pathology
;
Postural Balance
;
Spine
2.Is S1 Alar Iliac Screw a Feasible Option for Lumbosacral Fixation?: A Technical Note
Zhi WANG ; Ghassan BOUBEZ ; Daniel SHEDID ; Sung Jo YUH ; Amer SEBAALY
Asian Spine Journal 2018;12(4):749-753
Nonunion at the lumbosacral junction is a classic complication of long construct and deformity corrections. Iliac fixations have been extensively studied in the literature and have demonstrated superior biomechanical proprieties and lower complication rates. S2 alar iliac screws address the drawbacks of classical iliac screws but demonstrate similar biomechanical advantage. The main aim of this paper was to describe the S1 alar iliac (S1AI) screw fixation technique while evaluating our early results. S1AI screw fixation technique has the advantage of being able to achieve pelvic fixation without dissection to the S2 pedicle entry and is therefore a viable option for salvage of a failed S1 promontory screw.
Congenital Abnormalities
;
Lumbosacral Region
;
Pseudarthrosis
3.Vertebral Augmentation: State of the Art.
Amer SEBAALY ; Linda NABHANE ; Fouad ISSA EL KHOURY ; Gaby KREICHATI ; Rami EL RACHKIDI
Asian Spine Journal 2016;10(2):370-376
Osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVF) are an increasing public health problem. Cement augmentation (vertebroplasty of kyphoplasty) helps stabilize painful OVF refractory to medical treatment. This stabilization is thought to improve pain and functional outcome. Vertebroplasty consists of injecting cement into a fractured vertebra using a percutaneous transpedicular approach. Balloon kyphoplasty uses an inflatable balloon prior to injecting the cement. Although kyphoplasty is associated with significant improvement of local kyphosis and less cement leakage, this does not result in long-term clinical and functional improvement. Moreover, vertebroplasty is favored by some due to the high cost of kyphoplasty. The injection of cement increases the stiffness of the fracture vertebrae. This can lead, in theory, to adjacent OVF. However, many studies found no increase of subsequent fracture when comparing medical treatment to cement augmentation. Kyphoplasty can have a protective effect due to restoration of sagittal balance.
Fractures, Compression
;
Kyphoplasty
;
Kyphosis
;
Osteoporotic Fractures
;
Public Health
;
Spine
;
Vertebroplasty
4.Comparison of morbidity and mortality of hip and vertebral fragility fractures: Which one has the highest burden?
Maroun RIZKALLAH ; Falah BACHOUR ; Mirvat el KHOURY ; Amer SEBAALY ; Boutros FINIANOS ; Rawad el HAGE ; Ghassan MAALOUF
Osteoporosis and Sarcopenia 2020;6(3):146-150
Objectives:
Hip fragility fractures were regarded as one of the most severe, but recent papers report on the underestimated burden of vertebral compression fractures. This study aims to compare morbidity and mortality of hip and vertebral fragility fractures in patients treated in the same setting.
Methods:
Patients aged 50 years with hip fracture, and those with vertebral fracture presenting to our hospital between January 2014 and January 2017 were included. Patients were evaluated 1 year after their index fracture. SF-36 scores, mortality, and institutionalization are then recorded. Patients were divided into 2 groups: hip fractures and vertebral fractures.
Results:
There were 106 and 90 patients respectively evaluated in hip and vertebral fracture groups at 1 year. Patients in both groups were comparable for age, sex, comorbidities and neuropsychiatric condition (P > 0.05). At 1 year follow-up, SF-36 showed better averages in all 8 scales in hip fracture group compared to vertebral fracture group. Mortality in the hip fracture group reached 32.1% compared to 10% for the vertebral fracture group (P < 0.01). Fifteen patients were institutionalized in the hip fracture group compared to 18 patients in the vertebral fracture group (P > 0.05).
Conclusions
When comparing patients treated in the same setting, hip fracture is associated with significantly increased mortality than vertebral fracture; however, the latter is associated with more morbidity.