Prospective randomized controlled comparison of posterior vs. posterior–anterior stabilization of thoracolumbar incomplete cranial burst fractures in neurological intact patients: the RASPUTHINE pilot study

Oct 27, 2017European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society

Comparing Back-Only and Back-Plus-Front Stabilization for Partial Upper Spine Burst Fractures in Patients without Nerve Damage

AI simplified

Abstract

21 patients were randomly assigned to either the posterior-anterior or posterior-only stabilization groups.

  • The clinical outcome, measured by the Oswestry Disability Index, indicated less but statistically insignificant disability (13.3% vs. 19.3%, p = 0.67) for the posterior-anterior group compared to the posterior-only group.
  • A crossover occurred in one patient from the posterior-only group, who required additional anterior stabilization due to severe initial loss of correction.
  • The control group experienced a worsening in bisegmental kyphosis from 10.7° to 15.6°, while the interventional group showed an improvement from 11° to 8.3°.
  • Results suggest better restoration of the sagittal profile for the posterior-anterior stabilization method.
  • To detect a clinically significant difference in the multicentre trial, a total of 266 patients is necessary, accounting for a 20% loss to follow-up.

AI simplified

Full Text

Full text is available at the source.

what lands in your inbox each week:

  • 📚7 fresh studies
  • 📝plain-language summaries
  • direct links to original studies
  • 🏅top journal indicators
  • 📅weekly delivery
  • 🧘‍♂️always free