Siri-Archawawat Chonnipa, Chaiyamongkol Weera
Department of Orthopedics, Faculty of Medicine, Prince of Songkla University, Songkhla 90110, Thailand.
Department of Orthopedics, Faculty of Medicine, Prince of Songkla University, Songkhla 90110, Thailand.
Int J Surg Case Rep. 2024 Sep;122:110184. doi: 10.1016/j.ijscr.2024.110184. Epub 2024 Aug 15.
Unstable sacral fractures usually have posterior pelvic and spinopelvic instability, which usually be classified as AO type C. There are many controversial points concerning the management of these fractures due to their rarity. Herein, we retrospectively review cases of this injury and propose a surgical guideline.
A 37-year-old female experienced back pain after a motor vehicle accident. Diagnostic imaging revealed an AO type C1 sacral fracture, Isler subtype 2a (case No. 7). Preoperative CT scan and CT reconstruction images showed a longitudinal fracture with a simple intraarticular fracture of the left S1 superior facet. Although the patient sustains a lumbosacral facet joint injury, the lumbosacral motion seems preservable after healing. The triangular osteosynthesis was chosen because it provides both transverse plane and vertical plane stability. The patient was allowed to continue weight-bearing ambulation after the operation. To maintain lumbosacral motion, the spinopelvic rod was removed in the postoperative seventh month.
The unstable sacral fracture might have instability in both the vertical and transverse planes. The fixation construct should provide both vertical and transverse stability. Regarding vertical fixation, it might cost a loss of lumbosacral motion, which the treating surgeon has to consider. The lumbosacral injury is sometimes trivial, and long-term lumbosacral motion is expectable. So, permanent spinopelvic fixation is not necessary. The patient's character is also an important factor. Whether the patient needs or does not need early progressive weight bearing after the operation determines the fixation method.
Unstable sacral fractures are rare conditions usually resulting from a high-energy injury. We have proposed a surgical management strategy for this group of fractures with an optimal fixation method based on three factors: 1) fracture morphology, 2) lumbosacral integrity, and 3) concomitant injury.
不稳定型骶骨骨折通常伴有骨盆后方及脊柱骨盆不稳定,通常归类为AO C型。由于此类骨折罕见,其治疗存在诸多争议点。在此,我们回顾性分析此类损伤病例并提出手术指南。
一名37岁女性在机动车事故后出现背痛。诊断性影像学检查显示为AO C1型骶骨骨折,伊斯拉尔(Isler)2a亚型(病例编号7)。术前CT扫描及CT重建图像显示为纵向骨折,伴有左侧S1上关节面单纯关节内骨折。尽管患者存在腰骶关节损伤,但愈合后腰骶部活动似乎可保留。选择三角骨固定是因为它能提供矢状面和冠状面的稳定性。术后允许患者继续负重行走。为维持腰骶部活动,术后第七个月取出脊柱骨盆棒。
不稳定型骶骨骨折可能在矢状面和冠状面均存在不稳定。固定结构应提供矢状面和冠状面的稳定性。关于矢状面固定,可能会导致腰骶部活动丧失,治疗外科医生必须考虑这一点。腰骶部损伤有时较轻,长期腰骶部活动是可以预期的。因此,永久性脊柱骨盆固定并非必要。患者的情况也是一个重要因素。患者术后是否需要早期逐渐负重决定了固定方法。
不稳定型骶骨骨折是罕见情况,通常由高能量损伤导致。我们基于三个因素提出了针对此类骨折的手术治疗策略及最佳固定方法:1)骨折形态,2)腰骶部完整性,3)合并损伤。