Managing Incomplete and Complete Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures (AO Spine A3 and A4). Results from a Prospective Single-Center Study Comparing Posterior Percutaneous Instrumentation plus Mini-Open Anterolateral Fusion versus Single-Stage Posterior Instrumented Fusion

OBJECTIVE: The treatment strategy for thoracolumbar burst fractures is still debated. The aim of this study is to evaluate clinical and radiologic outcomes of a 2-stage strategy with immediate posterior percutaneous instrumentation and delayed anterolateral fusion (group A) versus a single-stage open posterior instrumented fusion (group B).METHODS: Demographics and clinical and surgical data of patients operated for AO Spine A3 and A4 fractures were prospectively collected. Vertebral height and deformity were evaluated before and after surgery. Visual analog scale score for back pain, Oswestry Disability Index, and 12-Item Short Form Health Survey results for quality-of-life assessment were collected during follow-up.RESULTS: Among the 110 patients enrolled, 66 were allocated to group A and 44 to group B; the most common fractured level was T12 (34%). Postoperative complications were higher in group B, especially the wound infection rate (18% vs. 3%), and pseudomeningocele (14% vs. 0%). The 2-stage approach allowed an average long-term gain of 15.8 degrees at the local kyphosis of fractured vertebra and 5.8 degrees at the regional level (Cobb angle), versus 15.4 degrees and 5.5 degrees in group B. At 2 years follow-up, both groups showed significant functional improvements; however, the visual analog scale and Oswestry Disability Index metrics seemed more favorable for group A patients (P < 0.0001 vs. P < 0.003). A complete fusion rate was obtained in 100% of group A vs. 65% of group B.CONCLUSIONS: Our study indicates that percutaneous instrumentation and anterior fusion or an expandable cage lead to excellent long-term clinical and radiologic outcomes with a lower complication rate and higher fusion rate than those of open posterior approaches.