Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 29, 2025

Minimally Invasive Treatment for Thoracolumbar Burst Fracture Using Sagittal Alignment Screws and A Trauma Reduction Device
Published on: November 8, 2024
Percutaneous versus open posterior stabilization in AOSpine type A3 thoracolumbar fractures
Christoph J Erichsen1, Christoph-Eckhard Heyde2, Christoph Josten2
1Department of Trauma Surgery, BG Trauma Center Murnau, Professor-Küntscher Str. 8, 82418 Murnau, Murnau am Staffelsee, Germany. christoph.erichsen@bgu-murnau.de.
Background:
The purpose of this retrospective cohort study was to compare treatment strategies of two level-one trauma centers regarding clinical and radiological outcomes focusing on non-osteoporotic AOSpine type A3 fractures of the thoracolumbar spine at levels T11 to L2.
Methods:
Eighty-seven patients between 18 and 65 years of age that were treated operatively in either of two trauma centers were included. One treatment strategy includes open posterior stabilization whereas the other uses percutaneous posterior stabilization. Both included additional anterior fusion if necessary. Demographic data, McCormack classification, duration of surgery, hospital stay and further parameters were assessed. Owestry Disability Index (ODI), Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and SF-36 were measured for functional outcome. Bisegmental kyphosis angle, reduction loss and sagittal alignment parameters were assessed for radiological outcome. Follow up was at least 24 months.
Results:
There was no significant difference regarding our primary functional outcome parameter (ODI) between both groups. Regarding radiological outcome kyphosis angle at time of follow up did not show a significant difference. Reduction loss at time of follow up was moderate in both groups with a significantly lower rate in the percutaneously stabilized group. Surgery time was significantly shorter for posterior stabilization and anterior fusion in the percutaneous group. Time of hospital stay was equal for posterior stabilization but shorter for anterior fusion in the open stabilized group.
Conclusion:
Both treatment strategies are safe and effective showing only minor loss of reduction. Clinical relevant differences in functional and radiographic outcome between the two surgical groups could not be demonstrated.
Trial Registration:
It was conducted according to ICMJE guidelines and has been retrospectively registered with the German Clinical Trials Registry (identification number: DRKS00015693, 07.11.2018).
More Related Videos
12:25C-arm-Free Simultaneous OLIF51 and Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Fixation in a Single Lateral Position
Published on: September 16, 2022
09:07An Anesthesia, Surgery, and Harvest Method for the Evaluation of Transpedicular Screws Using an In Vivo Porcine Lumbar Spine Model
Published on: May 31, 2017