Historical Perspectives on the Evolution of Spino-Pelvic Fixation and its Implications on Clinical Care A Narrative Review

Alexander von Glinski*, Emre Yilmaz, Periklis Godolias, Lorin Benneker, F. C. Oner, Frank Kandziora, Gregory Schroeder, Klaus Schnake, Marcel Dvorak, Shanmuganathan Rajasekaran, Mohammad El-Sharkawi, Alexander Vaccaro, Richard Bransford, Thomas A. Schildhauer, Jens R. Chapman

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

Abstract

Study Design: Broad narrative review. Objectives: To review and summarize the evolution of spinopelvic fixation (SPF) and its implications on clinical care. Methods: A thorough review of peer-reviewed literature was performed on the historical evolution of sacropelvic fixation techniques and their respective advantages and disadvantages. Results: The sacropelvic junction has been a long-standing challenge due to a combination of anatomic idiosyncrasies and very high biomechanical forces. While first approaches of fusion were determinated by many material and surgical technique-related limitations, the modern idea of stabilization of the lumbosacral junction was largely initiated by the inclusion of the ilium into lumbosacral fusion. While there is a wide spectrum of indications for SPF the chosen technique remains is defined by the individual pathology and surgeons’ preference. Conclusion: By a constant evolution of both instrumentation hardware and surgical technique better fusion rates paired with improved clinical results could be achieved.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)228-240
Number of pages13
JournalGlobal Spine Journal
Volume15
Issue number1
Early online date11 Sept 2024
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jan 2025

Keywords

  • fixation
  • ilium
  • lumbopelvic
  • pelvic
  • S2AI
  • sacropelvic

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Historical Perspectives on the Evolution of Spino-Pelvic Fixation and its Implications on Clinical Care A Narrative Review'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this