Literature DB >> 19574829

Improvement of back pain with operative and nonoperative treatment in adults with scoliosis.

Justin S Smith1, Christopher I Shaffrey, Sigurd Berven, Steven Glassman, Christopher Hamill, William Horton, Stephen Ondra, Frank Schwab, Michael Shainline, Kai-Ming Fu, Keith Bridwell.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess whether back pain is improved with surgical treatment compared with nonoperative management in adults with scoliosis.
METHODS: This is a retrospective review of a prospective, multicentered database of adults with spinal deformity. At the time of enrollment and follow-up, patients completed standardized questionnaires, including the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Scoliosis Research Society 22 questionnaire (SRS-22), and assessment of back pain using a numeric rating scale (NRS) score, with 0 and 10 corresponding to no and maximal pain, respectively. The initial plan for surgical or nonoperative treatment was made at the time of enrollment.
RESULTS: Of 317 patients with back pain, 147 (46%) were managed surgically. Compared with patients managed nonoperatively, operative patients had higher baseline mean NRS scores for back pain (6.3 versus 4.8; P < 0.001), higher mean ODI scores (35 versus 26; P < 0.001), and lower mean SRS-22 scores (3.1 versus 3.4; P < 0.001). At the time of the 2-year follow-up evaluation, nonoperatively managed patients did not have significant change in the NRS score for back pain (P = 0.9), ODI (P = 0.7), or SRS-22 (P = 0.9). In contrast, at the 2-year follow-up evaluation, surgically treated patients had significant improvement in the mean NRS score for back pain (6.3 to 2.6; P < 0.001), ODI score (35 to 20; P < 0.001), and SRS-22 score (3.1 to 3.8; P < 0.001). Compared with nonoperatively treated patients, at the time of the 2-year follow-up evaluation, operatively treated patients had a lower NRS score for back pain (P < 0.001) and ODI (P = 0.001), and higher SRS-22 (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Despite having started with significantly greater back pain and disability and worse health status, surgically treated patients had significantly less back pain and disability and improved health status compared with nonoperatively treated patients at the time of the 2-year follow-up evaluation. Compared with nonoperative treatment, surgery can offer significant improvement of back pain for adults with scoliosis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19574829     DOI: 10.1227/01.NEU.0000347005.35282.6C

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurosurgery        ISSN: 0148-396X            Impact factor:   4.654


  43 in total

1.  Lateral lumbar interbody fusion for the correction of spondylolisthesis and adult degenerative scoliosis in high-risk patients: early radiographic results and complications.

Authors:  Brad Waddell; David Briski; Rabah Qadir; Gustavo Godoy; Allison Howard Houston; Ernest Rudman; Joseph Zavatsky
Journal:  Ochsner J       Date:  2014

2.  Likelihood of reaching minimal clinically important difference in adult spinal deformity: a comparison of operative and nonoperative treatment.

Authors:  Shian Liu; Frank Schwab; Justin S Smith; Eric Klineberg; Christopher P Ames; Gregory Mundis; Richard Hostin; Khaled Kebaish; Vedat Deviren; Munish Gupta; Oheneba Boachie-Adjei; Robert A Hart; Shay Bess; Virginie Lafage
Journal:  Ochsner J       Date:  2014

3.  Risk factors for major peri-operative complications in adult spinal deformity surgery: a multi-center review of 953 consecutive patients.

Authors:  Frank J Schwab; Nicola Hawkinson; Virginie Lafage; Justin S Smith; Robert Hart; Gregory Mundis; Douglas C Burton; Breton Line; Behrooz Akbarnia; Oheneba Boachie-Adjei; Richard Hostin; Christopher I Shaffrey; Vincent Arlet; Kirkham Wood; Munish Gupta; Shay Bess; Praveen V Mummaneni
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-05-17       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 4.  Impact of spine surgery complications on costs associated with management of adult spinal deformity.

Authors:  Samrat Yeramaneni; Chessie Robinson; Richard Hostin
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2016-09

Review 5.  Spinal reconstruction with pedicle screw-based instrumentation and rhBMP-2 in patients with neurofibromatosis and severe dural ectasia and spinal deformity: report of two cases and a review of the literature.

Authors:  Samuel K Cho; Geoffrey E Stoker; Keith H Bridwell
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2011-08-03       Impact factor: 5.284

Review 6.  Measuring outcomes in adult spinal deformity surgery: a systematic review to identify current strengths, weaknesses and gaps in patient-reported outcome measures.

Authors:  Sayf S A Faraj; Miranda L van Hooff; Roderick M Holewijn; David W Polly; Tsjitske M Haanstra; Marinus de Kleuver
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2017-05-22       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  Reducing revision rates following Pedicle Subtraction Osteotomy surgery: a single-center experience of trends over 7 years in patients with Adult Spinal Deformity.

Authors:  Tanvir Johanning Bari; Dennis Winge Hallager; Lars Valentin Hansen; Benny Dahl; Martin Gehrchen
Journal:  Spine Deform       Date:  2021-01-05

Review 8.  Pelvic parameters and global spine balance for spine degenerative disease: the importance of containing for the well being of content.

Authors:  Diego Garbossa; Matteo Pejrona; Marco Damilano; Valerio Sansone; Alessandro Ducati; Pedro Berjano
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-09-12       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 9.  Osteotomies in the treatment of spinal deformities: indications, classification, and surgical planning.

Authors:  Bassel Diebo; Shian Liu; Virginie Lafage; Frank Schwab
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2014-05-11

10.  Clinical and radiographic parameters that distinguish between the best and worst outcomes of scoliosis surgery for adults.

Authors:  Justin S Smith; Christopher I Shaffrey; Steven D Glassman; Leah Y Carreon; Frank J Schwab; Virginie Lafage; Vincent Arlet; Kai-Ming G Fu; Keith H Bridwell
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-10-18       Impact factor: 3.134

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.