1. 2017;20;E1063-E1072Sacroplasty: A Ten-Year Analysis of Prospective Patients Treated with Percutaneous Sacroplasty: Literature Review and Technical Considerations
   Prospective Study
   Michael E. Frey, MD, Christopher Warner, MD, Samuel M. Thomas, BS, Karan Johar, MD, Heathpaul Singh, BS, Maheen S. Mohammad, BS, and Douglas P. Beall, MD.

BACKGROUND: The treatment of sacral fractures has evolved since its first description in 1982. Several techniques for sacral augmentation have been developed since 2001, and the rate of improvement is rapid with over 50% reduction in pain achieved prior to post-procedure discharge of the patient. Pain reduction occurs primarily within the first 3 months and is sustained at 12 months; however, the long-term outcomes have not previously been studied.

OBJECTIVES: We aim to evaluate the long-term efficacy of sacroplasty versus non-surgical management (NSM) in treating sacral insufficiency fractures (SIFs), including the effect on pain relief, opioid and other analgesic use, patient satisfaction, and complication rates. Additionally, we aim to review the most current sacroplasty literature.

STUDY DESIGN: A 10-year prospective, observational cohort study of patients with SIFs treated with sacral augmentation.

SETTING: A single-center interventional pain management private practice.

METHODS: Two-hundred and forty-four patients with SIFs were treated with sacroplasty (210 patients) or NSM (34 patients) beginning in January 2004 and then followed for 10 years. The patients’ gender, age, pre-procedure pain duration, analgesic use, pain level, and satisfaction were recorded at baseline and at post-procedure follow-up intervals of 2, 4, 12, 24, 52 weeks, and 2 years. The experimental group was then contacted at 10 years. Post-procedure complications before discharge and at each follow-up were also evaluated.

RESULTS: Both NSM and sacroplasty resulted in statistically significant drops in visual analog scale (VAS) scores from pre-treatment to 2-year follow-up (P < 0.001). When measured from follow-up to follow-up, the NSM group’s only significant decrease in the mean VAS score was between pre-treatment and 2 weeks (P = 0.002). The experimental group had significant decreases over the periods pre-op through post-op (P < 0.001), post-op through 2 weeks (P < 0.001), 12 weeks through 24 weeks (P = 0.014), and 24 weeks through one year (P = 0.002). The experimental cohort experienced statistically significant drops in the mean VAS scores between follow-ups for a longer period of time. Opioid and non-opioid analgesic use was markedly decreased preoperatively to postoperatively and was sustained at the 10-year follow-up.

LIMITATIONS: Patients were placed into the control group, NSM, if they did not meet inclusion criteria for sacroplasty. However, the baseline characteristics of the sacroplasty versus NSM group were not statistically different. Additionally, the control group was only followed through 2 years and was not contacted at the 10-year follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS: Our results and those reported in previous studies establish that sacroplasty allows for decreased use of medications and results in pain relief, greater patient mobility, and improved patient satisfaction. In addition to the published body of literature, our results show strong evidence in support of sacroplasty as a safe and efficacious treatment of SIFs.

KEY WORDS: Sacroplasty, sacral fracture, fracture, osteoporosis, insufficiency, radiology