The benefits of elective spinal implant removal: a retrospective study of 137 XXXX .

@entity1 @entity4438 @entity158 @entity717 @entity130
PURPOSE: While spinal instrumentations are becoming more common, the advantages of elective spinal implant removal remain ambiguous. We hypothesized that elective implant removal of the posterior spine is beneficial. METHODS: A retrospective study evaluated 137 consecutive @entity130 @entity1 with elective implant removal of the posterior spine. If additional cages were present, they were not removed. Primary outcomes were the change in pre- and post-operative @entity158 , fingertip-floor distance (FFD), and Cobb angles. Some secondary outcomes consisted of complications, @entity717 , and pelvic incidence (PI). Different stabilization approaches and cage sizes were compared. RESULTS: The presence and amount of @entity158 as well as the FFD showed significant improvement. There was no loss of reduction. @entity130 was observed in 9  %, but only 3  % needed revision. @entity4438 were seen only in @entity1 (9  %) that had stand-alone posterior surgery. Larger cages were associated with @entity717 . An increased PI was associated with less post-operative @entity158 and decreased FFD. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, @entity130 @entity1 benefited from elective implant removal of the posterior spine due to lower presence and level of @entity158 , improved function and low revision rates; irrespective of an initial combined or stand-alone posterior approach or varying cage sizes. However, stand-alone posterior instrumentation may be accompanied by increased rates of fascial dehiscence surgeries and larger cages may lead to @entity717 . Increased PI may be associated with @entity158 after spinal implant removal.
