STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective study. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the incidence of neurologic deficits after scoliosis correction at 1 institution and identify the risk factors for such deficits in scoliosis correction. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Neurologic deficit is one of the risks of surgical correction of scoliosis. Reports of the incidence of the neurologic deficits involving a large number of cases at 1 institution are rare. METHODS: Statistical analysis of the neurologic deficits was performed in 1373 scoliosis cases treated at 1 institution by etiologies in light of the patients' sex, age, sagittal profile, surgical approach, Cobb's angle, and the type of surgery. RESULTS: The total incidence of neurologic deficits was 1.89% and that of serious and mild ones was 0.51% and 1.38%, respectively. The total incidence of neurologic deficits were 1.06% in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients and 2.89% in congenital scoliosis (CS) patients, 3.32% in scoliosis patients with hyperkyphosis (>40 degrees ) and 1.38% in those without hyperkyphosis, 3.43% for combined procedures and 1.24% for single posterior procedures, 3.69% in patients with Cobb's angle more than 90 degrees and 1.45% in those with an angle less than 90 degrees , 1.68% with primary surgery and 5.97% with revision surgery, the difference between them was significant (P < 0.05). In adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients, the incidence were 3.85% for combined procedures and 0.64% for posterior procedure, 0.82% with primary surgery and 8.33% with revision surgery, 4.17% with hyperkyphosis and 0.61% without hyperkyphosis, the difference between them was significant (P < 0.05). The incidence of CS patients with Cobb's angle more or less than 90 degrees were 7.23% and 1.68% and the difference was significant (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: In surgical correction of scoliosis, the risk factors for neurologic deficits include CS, scoliosis with hyperkyphosis, scoliosis correction by combined procedures, scoliosis with a Cobb's angle more than 90 degrees , and a revision surgery.
STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective study. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the incidence of neurologic deficits after scoliosis correction at 1 institution and identify the risk factors for such deficits in scoliosis correction. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Neurologic deficit is one of the risks of surgical correction of scoliosis. Reports of the incidence of the neurologic deficits involving a large number of cases at 1 institution are rare. METHODS: Statistical analysis of the neurologic deficits was performed in 1373 scoliosis cases treated at 1 institution by etiologies in light of the patients' sex, age, sagittal profile, surgical approach, Cobb's angle, and the type of surgery. RESULTS: The total incidence of neurologic deficits was 1.89% and that of serious and mild ones was 0.51% and 1.38%, respectively. The total incidence of neurologic deficits were 1.06% in adolescent idiopathic scoliosispatients and 2.89% in congenital scoliosis (CS) patients, 3.32% in scoliosispatients with hyperkyphosis (>40 degrees ) and 1.38% in those without hyperkyphosis, 3.43% for combined procedures and 1.24% for single posterior procedures, 3.69% in patients with Cobb's angle more than 90 degrees and 1.45% in those with an angle less than 90 degrees , 1.68% with primary surgery and 5.97% with revision surgery, the difference between them was significant (P < 0.05). In adolescent idiopathic scoliosispatients, the incidence were 3.85% for combined procedures and 0.64% for posterior procedure, 0.82% with primary surgery and 8.33% with revision surgery, 4.17% with hyperkyphosis and 0.61% without hyperkyphosis, the difference between them was significant (P < 0.05). The incidence of CSpatients with Cobb's angle more or less than 90 degrees were 7.23% and 1.68% and the difference was significant (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: In surgical correction of scoliosis, the risk factors for neurologic deficits include CS, scoliosis with hyperkyphosis, scoliosis correction by combined procedures, scoliosis with a Cobb's angle more than 90 degrees , and a revision surgery.
Authors: Athanasios I Tsirikos; Andrew D Duckworth; Lindsay E Henderson; Ciara Michaelson Journal: Med Princ Pract Date: 2019-06-04 Impact factor: 1.927
Authors: F Pastorelli; M Di Silvestre; R Plasmati; R Michelucci; T Greggi; A Morigi; M R Bacchin; S Bonarelli; A Cioni; F Vommaro; N Fini; F Lolli; P Parisini Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2011-03-18 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: Rajiv R Iyer; Michael G Vitale; Adam N Fano; Hiroko Matsumoto; Daniel J Sucato; Amer F Samdani; Justin S Smith; Munish C Gupta; Michael P Kelly; Han Jo Kim; Daniel M Sciubba; Samuel K Cho; David W Polly; Oheneba Boachie-Adjei; Peter D Angevine; Stephen J Lewis; Lawrence G Lenke Journal: Spine Deform Date: 2022-02-23
Authors: Charles E Mackel; Ajit Jada; Amer F Samdani; James H Stephen; James T Bennett; Ali A Baaj; Steven W Hwang Journal: Childs Nerv Syst Date: 2018-08-04 Impact factor: 1.475
Authors: Weijun Wang; Zezhang Zhu; Feng Zhu; Bin Wang; Winnie C W Chu; Jack C Y Cheng; Yong Qiu Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2008-05-31 Impact factor: 3.134