STUDY DESIGN: A case series of idiopathic scoliosis patients treated with thoracoscopic anterior instrumentation was compared to a similar group of patients treated by open anterior instrumentation. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the morbidity associated with thoracoscopic instrumentation compared to the open approach for thoracic scoliosis. METHODS: A consecutive group of thoracoscopically treated patients with Lenke 1 adolescent idiopathic scoliosis was compared to similar patients gathered from the DePuy-AcroMed Harms Study Group database. Perioperative outcome measures as well as early postoperative functional outcomes (pulmonary function, shoulder strength) were compared. RESULTS: There were 38 thoracoscopic instrumentation cases with greater than 6 months' follow-up that were compared to 68 anterior open instrumentation cases. The radiographic outcomes were similar (60% +/- 11% vs. 59% +/- 17% thoracic curve correction for the thoracoscopic and open groups, respectively). The reduction in forced vital capacity was significantly (P = 0.01) greater in the open group (0.6 +/- 0.3 L) compared to the endoscopic group (0.4 +/- 0.3 L). There was a trend towards greater return of shoulder girdle strength and range of motion 6 weeks after surgery in the thoracoscopic patients. CONCLUSION: The thoracoscopic approach for instrumentation of scoliosis has advantages of reduced chest wall morbidity compared with the open thoracotomy method but allows comparable curve correction.
STUDY DESIGN: A case series of idiopathic scoliosispatients treated with thoracoscopic anterior instrumentation was compared to a similar group of patients treated by open anterior instrumentation. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the morbidity associated with thoracoscopic instrumentation compared to the open approach for thoracic scoliosis. METHODS: A consecutive group of thoracoscopically treated patients with Lenke 1 adolescent idiopathic scoliosis was compared to similar patients gathered from the DePuy-AcroMed Harms Study Group database. Perioperative outcome measures as well as early postoperative functional outcomes (pulmonary function, shoulder strength) were compared. RESULTS: There were 38 thoracoscopic instrumentation cases with greater than 6 months' follow-up that were compared to 68 anterior open instrumentation cases. The radiographic outcomes were similar (60% +/- 11% vs. 59% +/- 17% thoracic curve correction for the thoracoscopic and open groups, respectively). The reduction in forced vital capacity was significantly (P = 0.01) greater in the open group (0.6 +/- 0.3 L) compared to the endoscopic group (0.4 +/- 0.3 L). There was a trend towards greater return of shoulder girdle strength and range of motion 6 weeks after surgery in the thoracoscopic patients. CONCLUSION: The thoracoscopic approach for instrumentation of scoliosis has advantages of reduced chest wall morbidity compared with the open thoracotomy method but allows comparable curve correction.
Authors: Scott J Luhmann; Lawrence G Lenke; Yongjung J Kim; Keith H Bridwell; Mario Schootman Journal: J Child Orthop Date: 2008-02-14 Impact factor: 1.548
Authors: Marinus de Kleuver; Stephen J Lewis; Niccole M Germscheid; Steven J Kamper; Ahmet Alanay; Sigurd H Berven; Kenneth M Cheung; Manabu Ito; Lawrence G Lenke; David W Polly; Yong Qiu; Maurits van Tulder; Christopher Shaffrey Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2014-06-24 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: Hak Sun Kim; Jin Oh Park; Ankur Nanda; Phillip Anthony Kho; Jin Young Kim; Hwan Mo Lee; Seong Hwan Moon; Jung Won Ha; Eun Kyoung Ahn; Dong Eun Shin; Sung Jun Kim; Eun Su Moon Journal: Yonsei Med J Date: 2010-09 Impact factor: 2.759