Minimally Invasive Surgery for Pars Interarticularis Fractures

Aman Maikaula^*
*Correspondence: Aman Maikaula, Department of Neurological Surgery, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Mexico City 04510, Mexico, Email:

Keywords

Minimally invasive surgery • Pars interarticularis fractures • Spondylolysis • Spinal surgery

Introduction

Pars interarticularis fractures, commonly associated with spondylolysis, pose a considerable clinical challenge due to their potential to result in spinal instability and chronic back pain. Traditional open surgical approaches for addressing these fractures have been effective but are often associated with increased morbidity and longer recovery times. The advent of Minimally Invasive Surgery (MIS) techniques has sparked interest in providing effective and efficient alternatives for managing pars interarticularis fractures. This review aims to explore the current landscape of MIS for these fractures, shedding light on evolving techniques, clinical outcomes and the potential advantages of minimally invasive interventions. A pars interarticularis fracture is a specific type of spinal fracture that occurs in the region between the superior and inferior articular processes of the vertebrae. This anatomical region, also known as the isthmus, is vulnerable to stress-related fractures and such fractures are often associated with a condition called spondylolysis. Understanding the anatomy, causes, symptoms, diagnostic methods and treatment options for pars interarticularis fractures is crucial for clinicians, radiologists and orthopaedic specialists involved in the care of individuals with spinal conditions [1].

The pars interarticularis plays a crucial role in maintaining the stability of the spine. Fractures in this area can be categorized as stress fractures, acute fractures, or fatigue fractures. Stress fractures often result from repetitive stress on the spine, commonly seen in athletes engaged in activities requiring hyperextension of the lower back, such as gymnastics, football, or weightlifting. Acute fractures, on the other hand, may occur due to trauma or sudden excessive force, while fatigue fractures are a result of repetitive micro trauma without adequate time for healing. Clinical presentation of pars interarticularis fractures can vary. Many individuals with spondylolysis or pars fractures may be asymptomatic, while others may experience localized lower back pain, stiffness, or discomfort that worsens with activities like standing, walking, or arching the back. In more severe cases, nerve compression may lead to radiating pain, numbness, or weakness in the legs [2].

Literature Review

The literature reveals a growing body of evidence supporting the application of minimally invasive techniques for pars interarticularis fractures. MIS approaches include percutaneous screw fixation, endoscopic-assisted fusion and other novel procedures aimed at achieving fracture stabilization with reduced tissue disruption. Studies consistently highlight the benefits of MIS, such as decreased blood loss, shorter hospital stays and quicker return to daily activities compared to traditional open surgery. Furthermore, the minimally invasive approaches demonstrate comparable or superior clinical outcomes in terms of pain relief, functional recovery and fusion rates. Diagnostic imaging, particularly through X-rays, CT scans, or MRI, plays a pivotal role in confirming the presence and severity of pars interarticularis fractures. X-rays are often the initial imaging modality, revealing bony abnormalities, such as a "Scottie dog" appearance associated with spondylolysis. CT scans provide detailed images of bone structures, offering a more comprehensive assessment of the fracture, while MRI is valuable for evaluating soft tissues and detecting nerve compression [3].

Treatment strategies for pars interarticularis fractures range from conservative management to surgical interventions, depending on the severity of the fracture and the presence of associated symptoms. Conservative approaches typically involve rest, activity modification, physical therapy and pain management. Bracing may be employed to provide additional support and limit excessive movement during the healing process. Surgical options may be considered in cases of persistent pain, neurological symptoms, or when conservative measures prove ineffective. Surgical interventions can include pars repair through various techniques, such as screw fixation, bone grafting, or spinal fusion. The choice of surgical approach depends on factors like the patient's age, overall health and the specific characteristics of the fracture [4].

The prognosis for individuals with pars interarticularis fractures is generally favorable, especially with timely and appropriate management. Conservative measures often lead to successful outcomes, allowing individuals to return to their normal activities. Surgical interventions, while more invasive, can also provide excellent results in terms of pain relief and functional improvement. Despite these promising findings, the literature also acknowledges challenges associated with MIS for pars interarticularis fractures, including a learning curve for surgeons, radiation exposure during fluoroscopy-guided procedures and potential complications such as screw malpositioning. Continued advancements in imaging technologies, intraoperative navigation and surgeon training may address some of these challenges and further enhance the efficacy and safety of MIS techniques for treating pars interarticularis fractures [5].

Discussion

The discussion encompasses the nuances of MIS techniques in the context of pars interarticularis fractures. Percutaneous screw fixation, guided by fluoroscopy or navigation systems, offers a minimally invasive option for stabilizing fractures while preserving surrounding tissues. Endoscopicassisted fusion techniques, though technically demanding, provide a direct visualization of the fracture site, potentially improving accuracy and reducing the risk of complications. The choice between these approaches depends on factors such as fracture characteristics, surgeon expertise and patient-specific considerations. The benefits of MIS, including reduced soft tissue damage, shorter hospitalization and quicker recovery, align with the evolving trend toward outpatient and ambulatory spinal surgeries. While acknowledging the potential advantages, it is crucial to consider the learning curve associated with MIS procedures and the need for ongoing evaluation of long-term outcomes. Additionally, patient selection, thorough preoperative planning and precise intraoperative execution are paramount for achieving successful outcomes with minimally invasive interventions [6].

Conclusion

In conclusion, minimally invasive surgery has emerged as a viable and promising approach for the management of pars interarticularis fractures. Percutaneous screw fixation and endoscopic-assisted fusion techniques demonstrate encouraging results, offering benefits in terms of reduced morbidity and expedited recovery. The on-going refinement of MIS procedures, along with advancements in imaging and navigation technologies, holds the potential to further enhance the safety and efficacy of these approaches. While challenges exist, continued research and clinical experience will likely contribute to refining patient selection criteria, improving surgical techniques and optimizing outcomes for individuals with pars interarticularis fractures. The evolving landscape of minimally invasive surgery in spinal interventions underscores the importance of on-going exploration and critical evaluation of emerging techniques in fracture management.

Acknowledgement

None.

Conflict of Interest

There are no conflicts of interest by author.

References

1. Roche, Maurice B. and George G. Rowe. "The incidence of separate neural arch and coincident bone variations: A summary." JBJS 34 (1952): 491-493.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

2. Tatsumura, Masaki, Hisanori Gamada, Ryu Ishimoto and Shun Okuwaki, et al. "Prevalence of curable and pseudoarthrosis stages of adolescent lumbar spondylolysis." J Rural Med 13 (2018): 105-109.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

3. Choi, Jeffrey H., Jonathan K. Ochoa, Ariadna Lubinus and Stephen Timon, et al. "Management of lumbar spondylolysis in the adolescent athlete: A review of over 200 cases." Spine J 22 (2022): 1628-1633.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

4. Rosenberg, Norman J., William L. Bargar and B. Friedman. "The incidence of spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis in nonambulatory patients." Spine 6 (1981): 35-38.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

5. Debnath, Ujjwal K. "Lumbar spondylolysis-current concepts review." J Clin Orthop Trauma 21 (2021): 101535.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

6. Newell, R. L. "Spondylolysis. An historical review." Spine 20 (1995): 1950-1956.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at