Clinical Outcomes Following Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Joint Fusion With Decortication: The EVoluSIon Clinical Study

被引:8
|
作者
Kucharzyk, Donald [1 ]
Colle, Kyle [2 ]
Boone, Christopher [3 ]
Araghi, Ali [4 ]
机构
[1] DK Orthoped, Crown Point, IN USA
[2] Reg Brain & Spine, Cape Girardeau, MO USA
[3] Proliance Orthopaed & Sports Med, 1231 116th Ave NE, Bellevue, WA 98004 USA
[4] CORE Inst, Sun City West, AZ USA
关键词
sacroiliac joint dysfunction; sacroiliac joint fusion; SI joint; SI joint arthrodesis; minimally invasive surgery; sacroiliac; fusion; arthrodesis; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED-TRIAL; MANAGEMENT; EUROQOL;
D O I
10.14444/8185
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: This report documents 1-year results of 250 patients enrolled in a prospective, multicenter study of a minimally invasive (MI) sacroiliac joint fusion (SIJF) system that uses decortication, graft placement, and joint fixation. Methods: The cohort includes all patients enrolled in the EVoluSIon (EVSI) clinical study who had MI SIJF surgery and completed 1-year follow-up. Average age at baseline was 60.5 years, and 70.8% were female. Sacroiliac (SI) joint-related pain duration was >= 2 years in 56% of patients. Visual analog scale (VAS) SI joint pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), quality of life, and opioid use were assessed preoperatively and at 1 year. Results: At 1 year, the mean VAS pain demonstrated a significant reduction of more than 43 points, from 76.4 at baseline to 33.0 (P < 0.0001), with 72.2% of patients attaining the minimal clinically important difference (MCID, >= 20-point improvement). Mean ODI scores also significantly improved from 54.4 at baseline to 30.5 at 1 year (P < 0.0001), with 62.5% of patients achieving the MCID (>= 15-point improvement). Prior to surgery. 62.7% (126/201) of patients were taking opioids or other narcotics, but by 1 year postsurgery. only 26.9% (54/201) of patients reported using these medications. representing a significant 57.1% decrease in narcotic/opioid use (P < 0.0001). Fusion of the SI joint was seen in 68.7% of patients. Few procedural complications were reported. In all, there were 8 (8/250) serious procedure-related events, including 1 device malposition observed on the day of surgery that required replacing the superior screw with a shorter screw. Conclusions: Analysis of patients treated with MI SIJF in the EVSI study demonstrated that the procedure can be performed safely and results in significant improvements in pain, quality of life. and opioid use at 1 year as well as causing fusion in the majority of patients.
引用
收藏
页码:168 / 175
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Minimally invasive arthrodesis for chronic sacroiliac joint dysfunction using the SImmetry SI Joint Fusion system
    Miller, Larry E.
    Block, Jon E.
    MEDICAL DEVICES-EVIDENCE AND RESEARCH, 2014, 7 : 125 - 130
  • [22] Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Joint Stabilization
    Novak, V
    Wanek, T.
    Hrabalek, L.
    Stejskal, P.
    ACTA CHIRURGIAE ORTHOPAEDICAE ET TRAUMATOLOGIAE CECHOSLOVACA, 2021, 88 (01) : 35 - 38
  • [23] Two-Year Outcomes from a Randomized Controlled Trial of Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Joint Fusion vs. Non-Surgical Management for Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction
    Polly, David W.
    Swofford, John
    Whang, Peter G.
    Frank, Clay J.
    Glaser, John A.
    Limoni, Robert P.
    Cher, Daniel J.
    Wine, Kathryn D.
    Sembrano, Jonathan N.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPINE SURGERY, 2016, 10
  • [24] Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Joint Fusion, Radiofrequency Denervation, and Conservative Management for Sacroiliac Joint Pain: 6-Year Comparative Case Series
    Vanaclocha, Vicente
    Herrera, Juan Manuel
    Saiz-Sapena, Nieves
    Rivera-Paz, Marlon
    Verdu-Lopez, Francisco
    NEUROSURGERY, 2018, 82 (01) : 48 - 55
  • [25] Three-Year Clinical Outcomes after Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Joint Arthrodesis Using Triangular Implants in Japan: A Pilot Study of Five Cases
    Kurosawa, Daisuke
    Murakami, Eiichi
    Koga, Hiroaki
    Ozawa, Hiroshi
    SPINE SURGERY AND RELATED RESEARCH, 2022, 6 (01): : 71 - 78
  • [26] Minimally invasive sacroiliac fusion, a case series, and a literature review
    Amer, Mohammad H.
    Elnahal, Walid A.
    Khaled, Sherif A.
    Abdel-Kader, Khaled F. M.
    Cass, Michael A.
    Gibbs, James
    Stott, Philip M.
    SICOT-J, 2022, 8
  • [27] Postoperative complications in patients undergoing minimally invasive sacroiliac fusion
    Schoell, Kyle
    Buser, Zorica
    Jakoi, Andre
    Pham, Martin
    Patel, Neil N.
    Hsieh, Patrick C.
    Liu, John C.
    Wang, Jeffrey C.
    SPINE JOURNAL, 2016, 16 (11) : 1324 - 1332
  • [28] Comparative effectiveness of open versus minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion
    Ledonio, Charles G. T.
    Polly, David W., Jr.
    Swiontkowski, Marc F.
    Cummings, John T., Jr.
    MEDICAL DEVICES-EVIDENCE AND RESEARCH, 2014, 7 (01) : 187 - 193
  • [29] Osseointegration of minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fixation implants-A human retrieval study
    Randers, Engelke
    Kibsgard, Thomas
    Nogueira, Liebert P.
    Kjensjord, Trygve
    Roehrl, Stephan M.
    Nordsletten, Lars
    Stuge, Britt
    JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC RESEARCH, 2024, 42 (08) : 1820 - 1830
  • [30] Minimally Invasive Inferior Intra-Articular Sacroiliac Joint Fusion: Successful Application of Osseous Stabilization Using Allograft Bone
    Lynch, Paul J.
    Tubic, Goran
    Foster, Jeffrey M.
    Puri, Shawn
    Burnette, Candice A.
    Block, Jon E.
    ORTHOPEDIC RESEARCH AND REVIEWS, 2022, 14 : 429 - 435