Is Implant Removal After Thoracolumbar Fracture Fixation Truly Necessary? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Radiological, Functional and Safety Outcomes

Study DesignSystematic review and Meta-analysis.ObjectiveTo compare radiological, functional and safety outcomes of implant removal vs implant retention following posterior fixation of thoracolumbar (TL) fractures.MethodsFollowing PRISMA guidelines, we searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane library from inception to October 2025. Randomised controlled trials (RCT) and comparative cohort studies comparing outcomes between planned implant removal and retention were considered. Primary outcome measures were Cobb angle correction, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and surgical site infection (SSI). Secondary outcomes included pain scores, kyphosis progression, reoperation rates, and patient reported outcome measures (PROM). Random effects models generated pooled mean differences (MD) and odds ratio (OR).ResultsEight studies with 571 patients met the inclusion criteria. Radiological outcomes were comparable between the groups. Improvements in Cobb angle were similar for the 2 groups [MD: 5.04°, 95% CI: 0.03-10.05 (implant removal group) vs MD 6.38°, 95% CI: 1.89-10.87 (implant retention group); <i>P</i> = .70]. Kyphosis progression also did not differ between the groups (MD: 0.41°; <i>P</i> = .37). Functional outcomes improved significantly within both groups; however, pooled ODI analysis demonstrated no between-group difference (<i>P</i> = .81). SSI rates were low across all studies, with no significant difference between the 2 groups [Odds ratio (OR)-1.42; <i>P</i> = .30). Pain scores improved similarly in both the cohorts, and the reoperation rates were infrequent and comparable.ConclusionImplant removal after healed TL fractures provides no radiological or functional advantage over implant retention for most patients. Both strategies demonstrate meaningful improvements in pain, spinal alignment and disability, with low complication rates. Implant removal may benefit in select young and symptomatic individuals; however, routine removal may not be recommended. Individualized decision-making remains essential.Level of EvidenceII.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Global Spine Journal
Published
2026-03-11
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/21925682261434578
Primary Topic
Spinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Is Implant Removal After Thoracolumbar Fracture Fixation Truly Necessary? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Radiological, Functional and Safety Outcomes

Sathish Kumar Rajappan Chandra, Khan Sharun, Luke Hiatt, Dhibin Vikash Kolarpatti Ponnusamy et al.
Global Spine Journal
Spinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
article

Is Implant Removal After Thoracolumbar Fracture Fixation Truly Necessary? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Radiological, Functional and Safety Outcomes

Sathish Kumar Rajappan Chandra, Khan Sharun, Luke Hiatt, Dhibin Vikash Kolarpatti Ponnusamy, Steven Theiss, Sathish Muthu, Vibhu Krishnan Viswanathan
article en

Abstract

Study DesignSystematic review and Meta-analysis.ObjectiveTo compare radiological, functional and safety outcomes of implant removal vs implant retention following posterior fixation of thoracolumbar (TL) fractures.MethodsFollowing PRISMA guidelines, we searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane library from inception to October 2025. Randomised controlled trials (RCT) and comparative cohort studies comparing outcomes between planned implant removal and retention were considered. Primary outcome measures were Cobb angle correction, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and surgical site infection (SSI). Secondary outcomes included pain scores, kyphosis progression, reoperation rates, and patient reported outcome measures (PROM). Random effects models generated pooled mean differences (MD) and odds ratio (OR).ResultsEight studies with 571 patients met the inclusion criteria. Radiological outcomes were comparable between the groups. Improvements in Cobb angle were similar for the 2 groups [MD: 5.04°, 95% CI: 0.03-10.05 (implant removal group) vs MD 6.38°, 95% CI: 1.89-10.87 (implant retention group); <i>P</i> = .70]. Kyphosis progression also did not differ between the groups (MD: 0.41°; <i>P</i> = .37). Functional outcomes improved significantly within both groups; however, pooled ODI analysis demonstrated no between-group difference (<i>P</i> = .81). SSI rates were low across all studies, with no significant difference between the 2 groups [Odds ratio (OR)-1.42; <i>P</i> = .30). Pain scores improved similarly in both the cohorts, and the reoperation rates were infrequent and comparable.ConclusionImplant removal after healed TL fractures provides no radiological or functional advantage over implant retention for most patients. Both strategies demonstrate meaningful improvements in pain, spinal alignment and disability, with low complication rates. Implant removal may benefit in select young and symptomatic individuals; however, routine removal may not be recommended. Individualized decision-making remains essential.Level of EvidenceII.

Global Spine Journal
SRM Institute of Science and Technology (IN), University of Alabama (US), Vinayaka Missions University (IN), Columbia Orthopaedic Group (US), Yuan Ze University (TW)
Openalex Percentile: Top 27%
Spinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.