2021CureusOpen access

Should Implant Breakage Be Always Considered as Implant “Failure” in Spine Surgery: Analysis of Two Cases and Literature Review

Anuj Gupta, Kalidutta Das, Kuldeep Bansal, Harvinder Singh Chhabra, Mohit Arora

Open full text 5 citations

Abstract

The advancement in the material of spinal implant and technique of spinal instrumentation has led to an increase in spine surgeries. The final desired outcome of spine surgery involving instrumentation is fusion. There is a race among implants to fail and bone to fuse. If there is a formation of pseudoarthrosis or failure to fuse then implants are bound to fail. The most common presentation of pseudoarthrosis is implant breakage. Hence, should we label every implant that has presented with breakage as a "failure"? In this article, we have discussed our experience of two cases presented to us with implant breakage but which were managed successfully with conservative methods. Both of our cases did well without any surgical intervention. We have follow-ups of seven years in one case and five years in the other. Every patient with pseudoarthrosis does not require surgical management and hence, every implant breakage should not be labeled as implant "failure".

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The advancement in the material of spinal implant and technique of spinal instrumentation has led to an increase in spine surgeries. The final desired outcome of spine surgery involving instrumentation is fusion. There is a race among implants to fail and bone to fuse. If there is a formation of pseudoarthrosis or failure to fuse then implants are bound to fail. The most common presentation of pseudoarthrosis is implant breakage. Hence, should we label every implant that has presented with breakage as a "failure"? In this article, we have discussed our experience of two cases presented to us with implant breakage but which were managed successfully with conservative methods. Both of our cases did well without any surgical intervention. We have follow-ups of seven years in one case and five years in the other. Every patient with pseudoarthrosis does not require surgical management and hence, every implant breakage should not be labeled as implant "failure".

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 5 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The advancement in the material of spinal implant and technique of spinal instrumentation has led to an increase in spine surgeries. The final desired outcome of spine surgery involving instrumentation is fusion. There is a race among implants to fail and bone to fuse. If there is a formation of pseudoarthrosis or failure to fuse then implants are bound to fail. The most common presentation of pseudoarthrosis is implant breakage. Hence, should we label every implant that has presented with breakage as a "failure"? In this article, we have discussed our experience of two cases presented to us with implant breakage but which were managed successfully with conservative methods. Both of our cases did well without any surgical intervention. We have follow-ups of seven years in one case and five years in the other. Every patient with pseudoarthrosis does not require surgical management and hence, every implant breakage should not be labeled as implant "failure".

Key concepts: Medicine, Implant, Implant failure, Breakage, Presentation (obstetrics), Surgery, Composite material, Materials science

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Should Implant Breakage Be Always Considered as Implant “Failure” in Spine Surgery: Analysis of Two Cases and Literature Review — Research Paper | ScholarLens