Literature DB >> 20802382

Preoperative and perioperative factors effect on adolescent idiopathic scoliosis surgical outcomes.

James O Sanders1, Leah Y Carreon, Daniel J Sucato, Peter F Sturm, Mohammad Diab.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: Prospective multicenter database.
OBJECTIVE: To identify factors associated with outcomes from adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) surgery outcomes and especially poor results. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Because AIS is rarely symptomatic during adolescence, excellent surgical results are expected. However, some patients have poor outcomes. This study seeks to identify factors correlating with results and especially those making poor outcomes more likely.
METHODS: Demographic, surgical, and radiographic parameters were compared to 2-year postoperative Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) scores in 477 AIS surgical patients using stepwise linear regression to identify factors predictive of 2-year domain and total scores. Poor postoperative score patients (>2 SD below mean) were compared using t tests to those with better results.
RESULTS: The SRS instrument exhibited a strong ceiling effect. Two-year scores showed more improvement with greater curve correction (self-image, pain, and total), and were worse with larger body mass index (pain, mental, total), larger preoperative trunk shift (mental and total), larger preoperative Cobb (self-image), and preoperative symptoms (function). Poor results were more common in those with Lenke 3 curve pattern (pain), less preoperative coronal imbalance, trunk shift and rib prominence (function), preoperative bracing (self-image), and anterior procedures (mental). Poor results also had slightly less average curve correction (50% vs. 60%) and larger curve residuals (31° vs. 23°). Complications, postoperative curve magnitude, and instrumentation type did not significantly contribute to postoperative scores, and no identifiable factors contributed to satisfaction.
CONCLUSION: Curve correction improves patient's self-image whereas pain and poor function before surgery carry over after surgery. Patients with less spinal appearance issues (higher body mass index, Lenke 3 curves) are less happy with their results. Except in surgical patient selection, many of these factors are beyond physician control.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20802382     DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181efa6f5

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


  5 in total

1.  How do idiopathic scoliosis patients who improve after surgery differ from those who do not exceed a minimum detectable change?

Authors:  Joan Bago; Francisco Javier Sanchez Perez-Grueso; Ferran Pellise; Esther Les
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-09-20       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Does patient perception of shoulder balance correlate with clinical balance?

Authors:  Antonia Matamalas; Juan Bagó; Elisabetta D'Agata; Ferran Pellisé
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-04-24       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Evaluation of Patient Outcome and Satisfaction after Surgical Treatment of Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Using Scoliosis Research Society-30.

Authors:  Hasan Ghandehari; Maryam Ameri Mahabadi; Seyed Mani Mahdavi; Ali Shahsavaripour; Hossein Vahid Seyed Tari; Farshad Safdari
Journal:  Arch Bone Jt Surg       Date:  2015-04

4.  Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: surgical treatment and quality of life.

Authors:  Luciano Miller Reis Rodrigues; Alberto Ofenhejm Gotfryd; André Nunes Machado; Matheus Defino; Leonardo Yukio Jorge Asano
Journal:  Acta Ortop Bras       Date:  2017 May-Jun       Impact factor: 0.513

5.  Predictors of persistent postoperative pain after surgery for idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  Anastasios Charalampidis; Lina Rundberg; Hans Möller; Paul Gerdhem
Journal:  J Child Orthop       Date:  2021-10-01       Impact factor: 1.548

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.