Literature DB >> 16166903

Apical sublaminar wires versus pedicle screws--which provides better results for surgical correction of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis?

Ivan Cheng1, Yongjung Kim, Munish C Gupta, Keith H Bridwell, Robert K Hurford, Stanley S Lee, Thongchai Theerajunyaporn, Lawrence G Lenke.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: The results of correction for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) were compared using apical sublaminar wires versus pedicle screws.
OBJECTIVE: To compare comprehensively the 2-year minimum postoperative results of posterior correction and spinal fusion using translational correction through either hybrid hook/sublaminar wire/pedicle screw constructs versus in situ rod-contouring correction with pedicle screw constructs in the treatment of AIS at 2 institutions. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Despite the reports of satisfactory correction of scoliotic curves by both apical (sublaminar wire) instrumentation and apical pedicle screw instrumentation, to our knowledge, no reports on the comprehensive comparison of hybrid (hook/sublaminar wire/pedicle screw) instrumentation versus segmental pedicle screw instrumentation exist.
METHODS: A total of 50 patients with AIS at 2 institutions who underwent posterior spinal fusion with sublaminar wire (25 patients) or pedicle screw (25) constructs were sorted and matched according to 4 criteria: (1) similar age at surgery (14.2 years in the sublaminar wire and 14.4 in the pedicle screw group, P = 0.72); (2) similar number of fused vertebrae (11.4 in the sublaminar wire and 11.8 in the pedicle screw group, P = 0.36); (3) similar operative methods; and (4) identical Lenke curve types and similar preoperative major curve measurements (63.5 degrees in the sublaminar wire and 59.5 degrees in the pedicle screw group, P = 0.42). Patients were evaluated preoperatively, immediately postoperatively, and at 2-year follow-up according to radiographic changes in curve correction, operating time, intraoperative blood loss, implant costs, and the Scoliosis Research Society patient questionnaire (SRS-24) scores.
RESULTS: After surgery, average major curve correction was 67.4% in the sublaminar wire and 68.1% in the pedicle screw group (P = 0.56). At 2-year follow-up, loss of the major curve correction was 4.6% in the sublaminar wire compared to 5.1% in the pedicle screw group (P = 0.79). Postoperative global coronal and sagittal balance were similar in both groups. No significant difference was found in the average number of levels fused from the distal end vertebra (1.48 in the sublaminar wire and 0.64 in the pedicle screw group, P = 0.21). Operating time averaged 350 minutes in the sublaminar wire and 357 in the pedicle screw group (P = 0.86). Intraoperative blood loss was significantly different in both groups (1791 +/- 816 mL in the sublaminar wire and 824 +/- 440 mL in the pedicle screw group) (P = 0.0003). Average implant cost in the sublaminar wire group (16.0 fixation points; 8,341 US dollars) was significantly lower than that of the pedicle screw group (17.1 fixation points; 13,462 US dollars) (P < 0.0001). Postoperative 2-year SRS-24 scores were similar in both groups (sublaminar wire = 107.3, pedicle screw = 103.5, P = 0.19). There were no neurologic or visceral complications related to sublaminar wire or pedicle screw instrumentation and no reoperations at a minimum 2-year follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS: Apical sublaminar wire and pedicle screw instrumentation both offer similar major curve correction with similar fusion lengths without neurologic problems in the operative treatment of AIS. Although more expensive, pedicle screw constructs had significantly less blood loss and slightly shorter fusion lengths than the sublaminar wire constructs.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16166903     DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000179261.70845.b7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  32 in total

1.  A randomized double-blinded clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a novel superelastic nickel-titanium spinal rod in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: 5-year follow-up.

Authors:  Jason Pui Yin Cheung; Dino Samartzis; Kelvin Yeung; Michael To; Keith Dip Kei Luk; Kenneth Man-Chee Cheung
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2017-08-04       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Sagittal profile control in patients affected by neurological scoliosis using Universal Clamps: a 4-year follow-up study.

Authors:  Guido La Rosa; Giancarlo Giglio; Leonardo Oggiano
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-03-10       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Selective thoracolumbar instrumentation with pedicle screws and sublaminar bands (universal clamps) in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  Claudio Lamartina; Riccardo Cecchinato
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  Reciprocal sagittal alignment changes after posterior fusion in the setting of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  B Blondel; V Lafage; F Schwab; J P Farcy; G Bollini; J L Jouve
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-06-22       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Use of the Universal Clamp for deformity correction and as an adjunct to fusion: preliminary results in scoliosis.

Authors:  Jean-Luc Jouve; Jérôme Sales de Gauzy; Benjamin Blondel; Franck Launay; Franck Accadbled; Gérard Bollini
Journal:  J Child Orthop       Date:  2009-11-28       Impact factor: 1.548

6.  Accuracy of pedicle screw insertion in posterior scoliosis surgery: a comparison between intraoperative navigation and preoperative navigation techniques.

Authors:  Wei Zhang; Tomoyuki Takigawa; YongGang Wu; Yoshihisa Sugimoto; Masato Tanaka; Toshifumi Ozaki
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-12-27       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  Segmental vs non-segmental thoracic pedicle screws constructs in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: is there any implant alloy effect?

Authors:  Mario Di Silvestre; Georgeous Bakaloudis; Carlo Ruosi; Valerio Pipola; Gianluca Colella; Tiziana Greggi; Alberto Ruffilli; Francesco Vommaro
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2017-03-27       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  Titanium vs cobalt chromium: what is the best rod material to enhance adolescent idiopathic scoliosis correction with sublaminar bands?

Authors:  Audrey Angelliaume; E Ferrero; K Mazda; M Le Hanneur; F Accabled; J Sales de Gauzy; B Ilharreborde
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-11-05       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  Loss of apical vertebral derotation in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: 2-year follow-up using multi-planar reconstruction computed tomography.

Authors:  Guanyu Cui; Kota Watanabe; Yuji Nishiwaki; Naobumi Hosogane; Takashi Tsuji; Ken Ishii; Masaya Nakamura; Yoshiaki Toyama; Kazuhiro Chiba; Morio Matsumoto
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-03-23       Impact factor: 3.134

10.  Efficacy and safety of posteromedial translation for correction of thoracic curves in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis using a new connection to the spine: the Universal Clamp.

Authors:  Keyvan Mazda; Brice Ilharreborde; Julien Even; Yan Lefevre; Franck Fitoussi; Georges-François Penneçot
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2008-12-16       Impact factor: 3.134

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.