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
来源
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPINE SURGERY | 2022年 / 16卷 / 01期
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
  • [31] Safety and 6-month effectiveness of minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion: a prospective study
    Duhon, Bradley S.
    Cher, Daniel J. d
    Wine, Kathryn D.
    Lockstadt, Harry
    Kovalsky, Don
    Soo, Cheng-Lun
    MEDICAL DEVICES-EVIDENCE AND RESEARCH, 2013, 6 (01) : 219 - 229
  • [32] Effect of BMI on clinical outcomes following minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy
    Patnam, Radhika
    Husk, Katherine
    Sripad, Abhishek
    Barletta, Kathryn
    Dieter, Alexis
    Geller, Elizabeth J.
    JOURNAL OF ROBOTIC SURGERY, 2021, 15 (01) : 63 - 68
  • [33] Effect of BMI on clinical outcomes following minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy
    Radhika Patnam
    Katherine Husk
    Abhishek Sripad
    Kathryn Barletta
    Alexis Dieter
    Elizabeth J. Geller
    Journal of Robotic Surgery, 2021, 15 : 63 - 68
  • [34] How Much Work Effort is Involved in Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Joint Fusion?
    Garber, Tara
    Ledonio, Charles G. T.
    Polly, David W., Jr.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPINE SURGERY, 2015, 9
  • [35] Duration and Magnitude of Opioid Use After Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Joint Fusion
    Benson, Dillon
    Litvak, Audrey
    Zhang, Douglas
    Johnson, Christopher
    El Dafrawy, Mostafa
    Lee, Michael
    SPINE, 2024, 49 (12) : 857 - 864
  • [36] Minimally Invasive Versus Open Sacroiliac Joint Fusion: Are They Similarly Safe and Effective?
    Ledonio, Charles G. T.
    Polly, David W., Jr.
    Swiontkowski, Marc F.
    CLINICAL ORTHOPAEDICS AND RELATED RESEARCH, 2014, 472 (06) : 1831 - 1838
  • [37] Propensity-matched Analysis of 1062 Patients Following Minimally Invasive Versus Open Sacroiliac Joint Fusion
    Ballatori, Alexander M.
    Shahrestani, Shane
    Chen, Xiao T.
    Ton, Andy
    Wang, Jeffrey C.
    Buser, Zorica
    CLINICAL SPINE SURGERY, 2021, 34 (08): : E477 - E482
  • [38] Four-year outcomes after minimally invasive transiliac sacroiliac joint fusion with triangular titanium implants
    Darr, Emily
    Cher, Daniel
    MEDICAL DEVICES-EVIDENCE AND RESEARCH, 2018, 11 : 287 - 289
  • [39] Minimally invasive arthrodesis of the sacroiliac joint (SIJ)
    Kasapovic, Adnan
    Ali, Thaer
    Jaenisch, Max
    Rommelspacher, Yorck
    Gathen, Martin
    Pflugmacher, Robert
    Schwetje, Desiree
    OPERATIVE ORTHOPADIE UND TRAUMATOLOGIE, 2022, 34 (02): : 98 - 108
  • [40] Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Fusion-a Review
    Matias, Caio M.
    Velagapudi, Lohit
    Montenegro, Thiago S.
    Heller, Joshua E.
    CURRENT PAIN AND HEADACHE REPORTS, 2022, 26 (03) : 173 - 182