Freehand S2-alar-iliac screw technique in lumbosacral spinal tumors

Abstract

Background: S2-alar-iliac (S2AI) screw technique is widely used in spinal surgery, but it is rarely seen in the field of spinal tumors. The aim of the study is to report the preliminary outcomes of the freehand S2AI screw fixation after lumbosacral tumor resection.

Methods The records of patients with lumbosacral tumor who underwent S2AI screw fixation between November 2016 to November 2020 were reviewed retrospectively. A freehand S2AI screw technique was performed by senior spine surgeons. Patients’ demographic data, radiographic findings, complications and overall survival were analyzed.

Results A total of 23 patients were identified in this study, including 12 males and 11 females, with an average age of 47.3±14.5 (range,15-73). The mean operation time was 224.6±54.1 (range, 155-370 minutes). The average estimated blood loss was 1560.9±887.0 (600-4000 ml). A total of 46 S2AI screws were implanted by freehand technique. CT scans showed 3 (6.5%) screws had penetrated the iliac cortex, indicating a 93.5% of implantation accuracy rate. No complications of iatrogenic neurovascular or visceral structure were observed. The average follow-up time was 31.6±15.3 months (range, 13-60 months). Two patients’ plain radiographies showed lucent zone around the screw. One patient underwent reoperation for wound delayed-infection. At the latest follow-up, eight patients had tumor-free survival, 11 had survival with tumor, and 4 died of disease.

Conclusion S2AI screw fixation is a repeatable and reliable technique for lumbosacral tumor surgery. Long-term follow-up is needed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of the S2AI screws.

Introduction

Spinopelvic fixation is indicated in various diseases, including kyphoscoliosis in adults, severe spondylolisthesis, severe pelvic obliquity, and sacral fractures with pelvic diastasis [1–3]. Over the years, a variety of techniques have been used for lumbopelvic fixation, including Galveston iliac rods, Jackson intrasacral rods, the Kostuik transiliac bar, iliac screws, S1 and S2 pedicle screws, and S2-alar-iliac (S2AI) screws [2–4]. At present, iliac screws and S2AI screws have been the predominant methods for lumbopelvic fixation, providing solid bony fusion across the lumbosacral junction.

The S2AI screw technique, first proposed by Sponseller in 2007 [5], has become a popular method for spinopelvic fixation over the past decade [1, 2, 4, 6]. This technique is mainly used for long-segment spinal fusion to the sacrum in children and adults with a spinal deformity or high-grade spondylolisthesis. Despite its ubiquitous use, the application of this technique in spinal reconstruction after resection of lumbosacral spinal tumors has been rarely reported. Spinal reconstruction following lumbosacral spinal tumor resection has been a great challenge. Pedicle screws are usually placed for fusion extending to S1 or S2 after lumbosacral spinal tumor resection. Although the combination of S1 and S2 pedicle screws is stronger compared to S1 screws alone, the biomechanical strength is not satisfactory because there is no increase in the overall strength of the lumbosacral fixation construct [7, 8].

The advent of the S2AI technique provides an alternative method to overcome the above problems. Our institutional senior surgeons prefer a freehand technique of S2AI according to the anatomical landmarks. The purposes of the study were: (1) to investigate the feasibility of the freehand S2AI screw technique in lumbosacral spinal tumors; (2) to reveal the complications and clinical outcomes of S2AI screw fixation.

Materials And Methods

Study design 

This study was approved by the institutional review board, and all patients provided informed consent. Patients with lumbosacral spinal tumors who underwent tumor resection and spinal-pelvic reconstruction between November 2016 and November 2020 were reviewed. The inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) patients with lumbosacral spinal tumor needing spinal-pelvic reconstruction, (2) the bone between the dorsal foramina of S1-2 was not invaded by the tumor, (3) patients with complete data and follow-up for more than 12 months. The exclusion criteria were as follows: (1) patients with deformity, degeneration, trauma, or infection; (2) those without S2AI screw implantation. All the S2AI screws were placed by senior spine surgeons.

Preoperative Evaluation

All patients in our series were evaluated meticulously by our group after admission. All patients preoperatively underwent X-ray, computed tomography (CT) with three-dimension reconstruction, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Patients with metastatic spinal tumors were examined by positron-emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) or single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) scan. Based on CT scans, detailed screw implantation plans were drafted, including entry point, trajectory direction, and screw length.

Surgical technique

After general anesthesia, the patient was placed in the prone position. A posterior midline incision was made, and meticulous subperiosteal dissection of the posterior elements was performed to extend to the sacroiliac joint laterally. Then S1 and S2 dorsal foramen were confirmed. The S2AI screw placement was performed by using the anatomic landmarks. The entry point was 2 mm lateral to the midpoint between the S1 and S2 dorsal foramen (Figure1. A) [9,10]. The screw trajectory direction was 20°-30° caudally in the sagittal plane and approximately 40° horizontally in the axial plane, pointing to the anterior inferior iliac spine (AIIS), where roughly two fingers of the superior border of the greater trochanter of the femur and can be palpated intraoperatively (Figure1. B, C). The entry point was drilled to make a 5-mm-deep cortical breach by a high-speed burr. A sharp pedicle probe was advanced toward the sacroiliac joint at the above angle. When the probe reached the SJ joint, at an approximate distance of 35 mm as described by Chang et al,⁶ an increased resistance was experienced. A ball-tip probe was used to palpate the osseous bottom of the channel. Then the pedicle probe was advanced toward the AIIS until it entered the ilium at a depth of about 80 mm. A ball-tip was reinserted to palpate to ensure that the floor and walls of the screw trajectory were intraosseous. If soft tissue or sudden advancement was palpated, a cortical breach was identified, and the screw path was salvaged by redirecting the pedicle probe in a more appropriate direction. The ball-tip probe was removed and the screw length reconfirmed with a hemostat clamp. The S2AI trajectory was undertapped 1 mm less than the desired screw diameter. Finally, a screw in a diameter of 7.0 to 8.5 mm and a length of 80 to 90 mm was inserted according to the measurement. The operation was completed according to the preoperative plan (Figure 1. D, E). 

Follow-up and evaluation

Data on patient demographics, tumor site, pathology, operation record, radiographic outcomes, and complications were collected and reviewed. Patients with metastatic tumors were followed up every three months after surgery. Those with primary lesions were routinely followed up every three months in the first two years and semiannually after that. Adjuvant therapies were added depending on the type of pathology. The accuracy of the S2AI screws was assessed by postoperative plain radiography and CT scans. All CT scans were reviewed independently by a senior radiologist for radiographic outcomes. When a cortical breach was found, the breach direction and distance were recorded and measured. Breaches were classified into four grades according to the severity: grade 0 (no breach), grade 1(a breach distance of less 3mm, mild), grade 2 (3 to 6 mm, moderate), and grade 3 (more than 6 mm) [11].

Statistical analysis

All statistical analyses were carried out using SPSS 22.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, New York, USA). Continuous variables were presented as the mean ± standard deviation. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate postoperative survival, and survival curves were analyzed and presented.

Results

General Data

General data of patients were summarized in Table 1. A total of 23 patients were included in this study, including 12 males and 11 females, with an average age of 47.3±14.5 (range: 15-73). All tumors were located in the lumbosacral spine region, including 2 in L4-5, 7 in L5, 6 in L5-S1, 8 in S1. Patients’ surgical and follow-up data were summarized in Table 3. The mean operation time was 224.6±54.1 minutes (range: 155-370 minutes). The average estimated blood loss was 1560.9±887.0 ml, with a range of 600-4000 ml.

Surgery Outcomes and Radiographic Evaluation

A total of 46 S2AI screws were implanted successfully by senior spine surgeons. All screws were inserted successfully without replacement (Figure 2). The length of implanted screws was detailed in Table 3. All patients received postoperative plain radiography and CT scans to evaluate the locations of the screws. The results confirmed that 43 screws were in good positions with an accuracy rate of 93.5% (43/46). Three screw breaches (6.5%) were observed in three patients, including one screw penetrating the anterior iliac cortex and two screws penetrating posterior iliac cortexes（Figure 3). Two of the screws were graded as 1 (mild), and one was graded as 2 (moderate). 

Complications

All surgery-related complications were detailed in Table 2. The three patients with screw breaches showed no complications of the vessel or visceral injuries. Eight (34.8%) of the patients experienced postoperative complications. Three (13%) patients had a postoperative cerebrospinal fluid leak. Two (8.7%, case 9, 19) patients had wound infection and underwent reoperation. One patient (case 9) had a treatment history of target therapy and radiotherapy before surgery. Another one developed delayed infection seven months after surgery and underwent a debridement procedure. Two (8.7%) patients had evidence of S2AI screw lucent zones, however, no fixation failure occurred. One patient developed a pulmonary infection and recovered after symptomatic treatment.

Follow-ups

The mean follow-up was 31.6±15.3 months (range, 13-60 months) after surgery. None of the patients had implant prominence or pain during the follow-up. Twenty patients received systemic adjuvant therapy according to the type of pathology, including chemotherapy, endocrine therapy, target therapy, immunotherapy, radiotherapy, bisphosphonates, and denosumab. The other three patients (case 16, 19, 21) who underwent en bloc resection of the tumor were regularly followed up only after surgery. At the latest follow-up, eight patients had tumor-free survival, 11 survived with tumor, and 4 died of the disease. The Kaplan-Meier survival curve is shown in Figure 4.

Discussion

The S2AI screw technique for spinopelvic fixation has been described in detail in the literature. This technique can be performed with an assist of a navigation system, robot, C-arm fluoroscopy or freehand placement [9, 11–17]. However, due to navigation or robotic system was not available in all centers, it was challenging to popularize and promote the technique. Furthermore, the requirement of intraoperative CT scan for the navigation system or robotic assist increases radiation exposure. The freehand S2AI technique, which was guided by anatomical landmarks, was presented and described in detail by Park et al [9] in 2015. In the following years, more scholars applied this technique to complete lumbosacral fixation [11, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21]. The entry point is 2 mm lateral to the midpoint between S1 and S2 dorsal foramen. The trajectory direction is approximately 20°-30° caudal angle in the sagittal plane and 30°-50° horizontal angle in the coronal plane connecting the posterior superior iliac spine (PSIS).

Previous anatomic and clinical studies have demonstrated that the freehand S2AI screw technique is as safe, accurate, and reliable as navigation and robotics. Park et al described a freehand S2AI screw technique in fresh-frozen human cadavers using pelvic anatomic landmarks [9]. Eight screws were implanted with the direction of an approximately 20° caudal angle in the sagittal plane and 30° horizontal angle in the coronal plane connecting the PSIS. They reported an accuracy rate of 100% evaluated by fluoroscopy and naked eye examination. Their team had also reported a total of 45 S2AI screws in 23 patients, only five of which demonstrated a breach, with no visceral or neurovascular complications [16]. Lombardi and colleagues preferred the freehand technique when spinopelvic fixation was required, which was thought to be a simple, safe, and effective method [2]. Shillingford et al described the freehand S2AI screw technique in which the entry point is lateral to the midpoint of the S1-2 dorsal foramen, directed toward the AIIS by aiming to a point just cephalad to the posterior edge of the PSIS and perpendicular to the lateral sacral crest [11]. The results showed that the average caudal angle was 24.2° ± 10.0° in the sagittal plane, and the mean horizontal angle was 39.3° ± 8.2° in the axial plane. The reported accuracy was 95% and only 5% of the screws were placed with cortical breaches. Their team then compared the accuracy of the freehand technique with that of the robot-guided insertion of S2AI screws, showing no difference in accuracy between the two methods (94.9% vs. 97.8%, p = 0.630) [21].

In our series, individualized protocols were performed to place S2AI screws. We excluded patients with tumors involving the bone of the dorsal foramina between S1 and S2 due to the compromised anatomic landmark of the entry point. The entry point was 2mm lateral to the midpoint of the dorsal foramen of S1-S2. The postoperative evaluation showed that only three (6.5%) screws were demonstrated with cortex breaches, and the accuracy rate of screw placement was 93.5%. There were no neurovascular and visceral injury complications related to S2AI screws during the operations, which was consistent with reports in the literature.

The advantages of S2AI screws for spinopelvic fixation make this technique more popular in recent decade. First, biomechanical studies have shown that S2AI screws have the same biomechanical strength as iliac screws and can be used as an alternative to iliac screws [11, 22–24]. Second, S2AI screw placement requires less dissection of the soft tissue. The rate of wound infection was significantly lower in patients with S2AI screws compared with those with iliac screws because the iliac screw technique requires dissection of the subcutaneous tissue off the lumbosacral fascia to the level of the PSIS [25–33]. In De la Garza Ramos’s meta-analysis, the infection rate in the iliac screw group was 25.4% compared with only 2.6% in the S2AI group [33]. In our series, the wound infection was 8.7%, which was similar to the literature reports. Thirdly, the location of conventional iliac screws is not in line with proximal lumbar screws, requiring offset-connectors for the connection of rod-system and iliac screws. In contrast to iliac screws, S2AI screws are in line with the posterior rod-system, without requiring connectors or complex bends for the connection with proximal lumbar screws. Furthermore, due to the more extensive soft tissue dissection, iliac screw implantation causes more soft tissue damage than S2AI screws. Moreover, the deeper location of S2AI screws entry point and more extensive soft tissue covering than conventional iliac screws results in less risk of implant prominence, reducing associated complications.

However, there are also disadvantages to S2AI screw fixation. Some scholars believe that S2AI screw fixation has a higher rate of implant failure. Guler et al found a failure rate of 35% for S2AI screws and 12% for iliac screws (p > 0.05) in their retrospective study [34]. All screw breakages were associated with the S2AI technique. Therefore, long-term follow-up results of S2AI screws need to be supported by large sample studies. There was no failure of internal fixation in our series during the follow-up. The reasons were as follows. First, no patients had a spinal deformity, and the balance between sagittal and coronal planes was not disturbed after the operation. Second, the follow-up time was not long enough to obtain extensive clinical data, which is also one of the shortcomings of the present study.

Current indications for spinopelvic fixation with S2AI screws mainly include high-grade spondylolisthesis, long-segment fusion constructs, flat back deformities, 3-column osteotomies, and correction of pelvic obliquity [2–4]. However, there is no consensus on the indications in the literature. It has been reported that S2AI screw fixation is also suitable for sacropelvic reconstruction after sacral tumor resection [2, 29, 35], but it is not widely used because lumbosacral spinal tumor is not common.

To our best knowledge, this study has the largest group of patients with lumbosacral tumors treated with the S2AI technique. Tumors in this region often require segmental resection or spondylectomy, which can cause spinal instability and require three-column reconstruction. In order to minimize surgical complications, S2AI screw fixation was selected as the preferred method. Therefore, we posit that the S2AI technique is suitable for spinopelvic reconstruction when no tumor is present in the bone between the S1-S2 dorsal foramina.

Conclusion

The freehand S2AI screw technique is reproducible, safe, and reliable in the management of lumbosacral spinal tumors. However, long-term follow-up is needed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of the S2AI screws.

Abbreviations

Declarations

Ethical approval: The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Shanghai Cancer Center.

Funding: No funds were received in support of this work.

Competing Interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

Data availability: The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author.

Consent to participate: Not applicable. 

Consent to publish: Not applicable.

References

1. Kebaish KM. Sacropelvic fixation: techniques and complications. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010;35:2245–2251.
2. Lombardi JM, Shillingford JN, Lenke LG, Lehman RA. Sacropelvic Fixation: When, Why, How? Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2018;29:389–397.
3. Moshirfar A, Rand FF, Sponseller PD, et al. Pelvic fixation in spine surgery. Historical overview, indications, biomechanical relevance, and current techniques. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87:89–106.
4. Jain A, Hassanzadeh H, Strike SA, et al. Pelvic Fixation in Adult and Pediatric Spine Surgery: Historical Perspective, Indications, and Techniques. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2015;97:1521–1528.
5. Sponseller PD. The S2 portal to the ilium. Semin Spine Surg. 2007;2:83–87.
6. Chang TL, Sponseller PD, Kebaish KM, Fishman EK. Low profile pelvic fixation: anatomic parameters for sacral alar-iliac fixation versus traditional iliac fixation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009;34:436–440.
7. Zindrick MR, Wiltse LL, Widell EH, et al. A biomechanical study of intrapeduncular screw fixation in the lumbosacral spine. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1986;203:99–112.
8. Galbusera F, Casaroli G, Chande R, et al. Biomechanics of sacropelvic fixation: a comprehensive finite element comparison of three techniques. Eur Spine J. 2020;29:295–305.
9. Park JH, Hyun SJ, Kim KJ, Jahng TA. Free hand insertion technique of S2 sacral alar-iliac screws for spino-pelvic fixation: technical note, acadaveric study. J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2015;58:578–581.
10. O’Brien JR, Yu WD, Bhatnagar R, Sponseller P, Kebaish KM. An anatomic study of the S2 iliac technique for lumbopelvic screw placement. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009;34:E439-E442.
11. Shillingford JN, Laratta JL, Tan LA, et al. The free-hand technique for S2-alar-iliac screw placement: a safe and effective method for sacropelvic fixation in adult spinal deformity. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2018;100:334–342.
12. Hu X, Ohnmeiss DD, Lieberman IH. Robotic-guided sacro-pelvic fixation using S2 alar-iliac screws: feasibility and accuracy. Eur Spine J. 2017;26:720–725.
13. Laratta JL, Shillingford JN, Lombardi JM, et al. Accuracy of S2 alar-iliac screw placement under robotic guidance. Spine Deform. 2018;6:130–136.
14. Ray WZ, Ravindra VM, Schmidt MH, Dailey AT. Stereotactic navigation with the O-arm for placement of S-2 alar iliac screws in pelvic lumbar fixation. J Neurosurg Spine. 2013;18:490–495.
15. Bederman SS, Hahn P, Colin V, Kiester PD, Bhatia NN Robotic guidance for S2-alar-iliac screws in spinal deformity correction. Clin Spine Surg. 2017;30:E49-E53.
16. Park YS, Hyun SJ, Park JH, Kim KJ, Jahng TA, Kim HJ. Radiographic and clinical results of freehand S2 alar-iliac screw placement for spinopelvic fixation: an analysis of 45 consecutive screws. Clin Spine Surg. 2017;30:E877-882.
17. El Dafrawy MH, Raad M, Okafor L, Kebaish KM. Sacropelvic fixation: a comprehensive review. Spine Deform. 2019;7:509–516.
18. Fang T, Russo GS, Schroeder GD, Kepler CK. The Accurate Free-hand Placement of S2 Alar Iliac (S2AI) Screw. Clin Spine Surg. 2020;33:102–103.
19. Choi HY, Hyun SJ, Kim KJ, Jahng TA, Kim HJ. Freehand S2 Alar-Iliac Screw Placement Using K-Wire and Cannulated Screw: Technical Case Series. J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2018;61:75–80.
20. Lin JD, Tan LA, Wei C, et al. The posterior superior iliac spine and sacral laminar slope key anatomical landmarks for freehand S2-alar-iliac screw placement. J Neurosurg Spine. 2018;29:429–434.
21. Shillingford JN, Laratta JL, Park PJ, et al. Human versus Robot: A Propensity-Matched Analysis of the Accuracy of Free Hand versus Robotic Guidance for Placement of S2 Alar-Iliac (S2AI) Screws. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2018;43:E1297-E1304.
22. Hoernschemeyer DG, Pashuck TD, Pfeiffer FM. Analysis of the S2 alar-iliac screw as compared with the traditional iliac screw: does it increase stability with sacroiliac fixation of the spine? Spine J. 2017;17:875–879.
23. OʼBrien JR, Yu W, Kaufman BE, et al. Biomechanical evaluation of S2 alar-iliac screws effect of length and quad-cortical purchase as compared with iliac fixation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2013;38:E1250-1255.
24. Burns CB, Dua K, Trasolini NA, Komatsu DE, Barsi JM. Biomechanical comparison of spinopelvic fixation constructs: iliac screw versus S2-alar-iliac screw. Spine Deform. 2016;4:10–15.
25. Sponseller PD, Zimmerman RM, Ko PS, et al. Low profile pelvic fixation with the sacral alar iliac technique in the pediatric population improves results at two⁃year minimum follow⁃up. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010;35:1887⁃1892.
26. Li J, Hu Z, Tseng C, et al. Radiographic and clinical outcomes of surgical correction of poliomyelitis-related spinal deformities: a comparison among three types of pelvic instrumentations. World Neurosurg. 2019;122:e1111-e1119.
27. Elder BD, Ishida W, Lo SL, et al. Use of S2-alar-iliac screws associated with less complications than iliac screws in adult lumbosacropelvic fixation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2017;42:E142-E149.
28. Ilyas H, Place H, Puryear A. A Comparison of Early Clinical and Radiographic Complications of Iliac Screw Fixation Versus S2 Alar Iliac (S2AI) Fixation in the Adult and Pediatric Populations. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2015;28:E199⁃205.
29. Mazur MD, Mahan MA, Shah LM, Dailey AT. Fate of S2-Alar-Iliac Screws After 12-Month Minimum Radiographic Follow-up: Preliminary Results. Neurosurgery. 2017; 80:67–72.
30. Smith EJ, Kyhos J, Dolitsky R, Yu W, O'Brien J. S2 Alar Iliac Fixation in Long Segment Constructs, a Two- to Five-Year Follow-up. Spine Deform. 2018;6:72–78.
31. Keorochana G, Arirachakaran A, Setrkraising K, Kongtharvonskul J. Comparison of Complications and Revisions After Sacral 2 Alar Iliac Screw and Iliac Screw Fixation for Sacropelvic Fixation in Pediatric and Adult Populations Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. World Neurosurg. 2019;132:408–420.
32. Hasan MY, Liu G, Wong HK, Hao TJ. Post-operative complications of S2AI versus iliac screw in spinopelvic fixation A meta-analysis and recent trends review. Spine J. 2019;20:964–972.
33. De la Garza Ramos R, Nakhla J, Sciubba DM, Yassari R. Iliac screw versus S2 alar-iliac screw fixation in adults: a meta-analysis. J Neurosurg Spine. 2018;30:253–258.
34. Guler UO, Cetin E, Yaman O, et al. Sacropelvic fixation in adult spinal deformity (ASD); a very high rate of mechanical failure. Eur Spine J. 2015;24:1085–1091.
35. Ishida W, Elder BD, Holmes C, et al. S2-Alar-Iliac Screws are Associated with Lower Rate of Symptomatic Screw Prominence than Iliac Screws Radiographic Analysis of Minimal Distance from Screw Head to Skin. World Neurosurg. 2016;93:253–260.

Tables