Dynamic stabilization: a nidus for infection?

Abstract

Introduction: Dynamic stabilization offers an adjunct to fusion with motion preservation. In comparison, standard instrumented fusion (if) consists of titanium screws and rods/plates, which do not allow for motion at the level of the fusion. The reported infection rate following a standard if ranges from 0.2% to 7%. Methods: a retrospective chart review of 142 patients who underwent posterior lumbar stabilization procedures was conducted. Ten patients received dynamic stabilization and 132 patients had a standard if. Rates of infection, requiring hardware removal, were compared between the aforementioned groups. Results: Of the 132 patients undergoing posterior if, three developed a deep wound infection requiring removal of hardware (2.3%). Of the 10 patients undergoing dynamic stabilization, three developed a deep wound infection (30%) with 2 requiring removal of hardware (20%), secondary to persistent deep wound infection or osteomyelitis at the pedicle screw sites. There was a significantly increased risk of deep wound infection (p < 0.0001) with the use of dynamic stabilization compared to standard if. Conclusions: Our series demonstrates that the infection rate in patients undergoing dynamic stabilization is higher than the infection rate for instrumented fusion without a significant difference in comorbidity scores. We postulate that the polycarbonate urethane spacer acts as a medium for bacteria, whereas the titanium screws and rods are smooth, solid, and inert, resulting in a lower risk of infection.

KEYWORDS:

• dynamic stabilization
• infection
• hardware removal
• posterior lumbar fusion