Objective: To describe the results of a single-surgeon series and systematically review the literature on cement-augmented instrumented fusion with fenestrated pedicle screws.
Methods: All patients treated by the senior surgeon using fenestrated screws between 2017 and 2019 with a minimum of 6-months of clinical and radiographic follow-up were included. For the systematic review, we used PRISMA guidelines to identify all prior descriptions of cement-augmented instrumented fusion with fenestrated pedicle screws in the English literature. Endpoints of interest included hardware loosening, cement leakage, and pulmonary cement embolism (PCE).
Results: Our series included 38 patients (mean follow-up 14.8 months) who underwent cement-augmented instrumentation for tumor (47.3%), deformity/degenerative disease (39.5%), or osteoporotic fracture (13.2%). Asymptomatic screw lucency was seen in 2.6%, cement leakage in 445, and pulmonary cement embolism (PCE) in 5.2%. Our literature review identified 23 studies (n = 1526 patients), with low reported rates of hardware loosening (0.2%) and symptomatic PCE (1.0%). Cement leakage, while common (55.6%), produced symptoms in fewer than 1% of patients. Indications for cement-augmentation in this cohort included: spine metastasis with or without pathologic fracture (n = 18; 47.3%), degenerative spine disease or fixed deformity with poor underlying bone quality (n = 15; 39.5%), and osteoporotic fracture (n = 5; 13.2%).
Conclusion: Cement-augmented fusion with fenestrated screws appears to be a safe, effective means of treating patients with poor underlying bone quality secondary to tumor or osteoporosis. High-quality evidence with direct comparisons to non-augmented patients is needed.
Keywords: Cannulated screws; Cement augmentation; Fenestrated screws; Osteoporosis; Polymethyl methacrylate; Spinal metastasis; Vertebral body augmentation.
Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier B.V.