Literature DB >> 19365248

Computed tomography evaluation of rotation correction in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a comparison of an all pedicle screw construct versus a hook-rod system.

Jahangir Asghar1, Amer F Samdani, Joshua M Pahys, Linda P D'andrea, James T Guille, David H Clements, Randal R Betz.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: Retrospective review with historical cohort.
OBJECTIVE: Our study measures axial rotation of the apical vertebral bodies of patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis treated with an all pedicle screw (APS) construct versus a hook-rod (HR) construct using computed tomography (CT). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Ecker et al (Spine 1988;13:1141-4) observed a 22% derotation of the apical vertebrate of the thoracic spine and 33% of the apical vertebra of the lumbar spine when using an HR system (CD instrumentation). More recently Lee et al (Spine 2004;29:343-9) reported 42.5% derotation of the apical vertebra (both thoracic and lumbar) in a series of APS constructs. Currently, there is no comparison series reported between the 2 types of constructs.
METHODS: From a database of 193 patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis and posterior spinal fusions, 32 patients were identified as having all APS constructs with pre- and postoperative CT scans. This cohort of patients was compared with a historical published cohort of patients treated with HR constructs by Ecker et al (Spine 1988;13:1141-4) Comparison of the groups showed no statistically significant differences for age and preoperative Cobb angle of the main curve (P > 0.05); however, there was a statistically significant difference (P < 0.05) in postoperative correction values. The apical vertebral rotation for the major curve was measured from the pre- and postoperative axial CT using the methods described by Aaro and Dahlborn (Spine 1981;6:460-7). RESULT: The average preoperative rotation was similar between the 2 groups (thoracic: HR = 22.6, APS = 21.3, P = 0.6; lumbar: HR = 19.4, APS = 20.6, P = 0.7). The postoperative correction had a significant difference (thoracic: HR = 16, APS = 8.5, P = 0.015; lumbar: HR = 13.4, APS = 7.0, P = 0.032). The percent correction of the apical vertebrae showed a significant difference, with 22% correction in the HR group and 60% in APS group (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: Our study finds axial rotation correction using APSs and a direct vertebral body derotation technique was significantly greater than that obtained with the HR construct.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19365248     DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181996c1b

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


  22 in total

1.  Mini-open anterior instrumentation with diaphragm sparing for thoracolumbar idiopathic scoliosis: its technique and clinical results.

Authors:  Yong Qiu; Feng Zhu; Bin Wang; Zezhang Zhu; Yang Yu; Xu Sun; Weiwei Ma
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2010-12-22       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Reversing the concept: correction of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis using the convex rod de-rotation maneuver.

Authors:  Yoram Anekstein; Yigal Mirovsky; Vitaly Arnabitsky; Yael Gelfer; Ira Zaltz; Yossi Smorgick
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-05-17       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Right adolescent idiopathic thoracic curve (Lenke 1 A and B): does cost of instrumentation and implant density improve radiographic and cosmetic parameters?

Authors:  Scott Yang; Sean M Jones-Quaidoo; Matthew Eager; Justin W Griffin; Vasantha Reddi; Wendy Novicoff; Jeffrey Shilt; Ernesto Bersusky; Helton Defino; Jean Ouellet; Vincent Arlet
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-04-26       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  Five-year clinical and radiographic outcomes using pedicle screw only constructs in the treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  Steven W Hwang; Amer F Samdani; Michelle Marks; Tracy Bastrom; Hitesh Garg; Baron Lonner; James T Bennett; Joshua Pahys; Suken Shah; Firoz Miyanji; Harry Shufflebarger; Peter Newton; Randal Betz
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-12-20       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  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

Review 6.  [Fusion in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis : Anterior, posterior or combined? One-stage or two-stage?].

Authors:  V Quack; B Rath; H Schenker; A Schulze; Y El Mansy; M Tingart; M Betsch
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 1.087

7.  In vivo three-dimensional segmental analysis of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  Takako Hattori; Hironobu Sakaura; Motoki Iwasaki; Yukitaka Nagamoto; Hideki Yoshikawa; Kazuomi Sugamoto
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-06-18       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 8.  A brief overview of 100 years of history of surgical treatment for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  Carol C Hasler
Journal:  J Child Orthop       Date:  2012-12-05       Impact factor: 1.548

9.  Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis treated with posteromedial translation: radiologic evaluation with a 3D low-dose system.

Authors:  Brice Ilharreborde; Guy Sebag; Wafa Skalli; Keyvan Mazda
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2013-04-12       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 10.  Do vertebral derotation techniques offer better outcomes compared to traditional methods in the surgical treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis?

Authors:  Paul R P Rushton; Michael P Grevitt
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-02-26       Impact factor: 3.134

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.