TY - JOUR
T1 - The Surgical Algorithm for the AO Spine Sacral Injury Classification System
AU - Lee, Yunsoo
AU - Lambrechts, Mark
AU - Narayanan, Rajkishen
AU - Bransford, Richard
AU - Benneker, Lorin
AU - Schnake, Klaus
AU - Öner, Cumhur
AU - Canseco, Jose A.
AU - Kepler, Christopher K.
AU - Schroeder, Gregory D.
AU - Vaccaro, Alexander R.
AU - Hockley, Aaron
AU - Zubairi, Akbar J.
AU - Barcelos, Alecio
AU - Del Arco, Alex
AU - Weening, Alexander
AU - Guiroy, Alfredo
AU - Guiroy, Alfredo
AU - Wael, Alsammak
AU - Bhandutia, Amit
AU - Nishanth, Ampar
AU - Joaquim, Andrei
AU - Joaquim, Andrei
AU - Persin, Andrew
AU - Gupta, Anuj
AU - El Naga, Ashraf
AU - El Naga, Ashraf
AU - Ullrich, Bernhard
AU - Saciloto, Bruno
AU - Cheng, Christina
AU - Bernucci, Claudio
AU - Kleweno, Conor
AU - Cruz, Daniel
AU - Dizon, Dave A.
AU - Aponso, Dihan
AU - Patronis, Dimitrios
AU - Martinez, Elias E.J.
AU - Pola, Enrico
AU - Gercek, Erol
AU - Lyons, Frank
AU - Camino-Willhuber, Gaston
AU - Tipper, Geoffrey
AU - Okano, Ichiro
AU - Bances, Ignacio F.
AU - Paredes, Igor
AU - Parampalli, Janardhana A.
AU - Matta, Javier
AU - Subbiah, Jayakumar
AU - Kitzen, Joep
AU - Alves, Jorge
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. All rights reserved.
PY - 2024/2/1
Y1 - 2024/2/1
N2 - Study Design. Global cross-sectional survey. Objective. To establish a surgical algorithm for sacral fractures based on the Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen (AO) Spine Sacral Injury Classification System. Summary of Background Data. Although the AO Spine Sacral Injury Classification has been validated across an international audience of surgeons, a consensus on a surgical algorithm for sacral fractures using the Sacral AO Spine Injury Score (Sacral AOSIS) has yet to be developed. Methods. A survey was sent to general orthopedic surgeons, orthopedic spine surgeons, and neurosurgeons across the five AO spine regions of the world. Descriptions of controversial sacral injuries based on different fracture subtypes were given, and surgeons were asked whether the patient should undergo operative or nonoperative management. The results of the survey were used to create a surgical algorithm based on each subtype's sacral AOSIS. Results. An international agreement of 70% was decided on by the AO Spine Knowledge Forum Trauma experts to indicate a recommendation of initial operative intervention. Using this, sacral fracture subtypes of AOSIS 5 or greater were considered operative, while those with AOSIS 4 or less were generally nonoperative. For subtypes with an AOSIS of 3 or 4, if the sacral fracture was associated with an anterior pelvic ring injury (M3 case-specific modifier), intervention should be left to the surgeons' discretion. Conclusion. The AO Spine Sacral Injury Classification System offers a validated hierarchical system to approach sacral injuries. Through multispecialty and global surgeon input, a surgical algorithm was developed to determine appropriate operative indications for sacral trauma. Further validation is required, but this algorithm provides surgeons across the world with the basis for discussion and the development of standards of care and treatment.
AB - Study Design. Global cross-sectional survey. Objective. To establish a surgical algorithm for sacral fractures based on the Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen (AO) Spine Sacral Injury Classification System. Summary of Background Data. Although the AO Spine Sacral Injury Classification has been validated across an international audience of surgeons, a consensus on a surgical algorithm for sacral fractures using the Sacral AO Spine Injury Score (Sacral AOSIS) has yet to be developed. Methods. A survey was sent to general orthopedic surgeons, orthopedic spine surgeons, and neurosurgeons across the five AO spine regions of the world. Descriptions of controversial sacral injuries based on different fracture subtypes were given, and surgeons were asked whether the patient should undergo operative or nonoperative management. The results of the survey were used to create a surgical algorithm based on each subtype's sacral AOSIS. Results. An international agreement of 70% was decided on by the AO Spine Knowledge Forum Trauma experts to indicate a recommendation of initial operative intervention. Using this, sacral fracture subtypes of AOSIS 5 or greater were considered operative, while those with AOSIS 4 or less were generally nonoperative. For subtypes with an AOSIS of 3 or 4, if the sacral fracture was associated with an anterior pelvic ring injury (M3 case-specific modifier), intervention should be left to the surgeons' discretion. Conclusion. The AO Spine Sacral Injury Classification System offers a validated hierarchical system to approach sacral injuries. Through multispecialty and global surgeon input, a surgical algorithm was developed to determine appropriate operative indications for sacral trauma. Further validation is required, but this algorithm provides surgeons across the world with the basis for discussion and the development of standards of care and treatment.
KW - AO Spine
KW - classification
KW - injury score
KW - injury severity
KW - pelvic fracture
KW - sacral fracture
KW - spine trauma
KW - validation
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85182755795&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/BRS.0000000000004876
DO - 10.1097/BRS.0000000000004876
M3 - Article
C2 - 37970681
AN - SCOPUS:85182755795
SN - 0362-2436
VL - 49
SP - 165
EP - 173
JO - Spine
JF - Spine
IS - 3
ER -