Literature DB >> 22057393

Lowest instrumented vertebra selection in Lenke 3C and 6C scoliosis: what if we choose lumbar apical vertebra as distal fusion end?

Yu Wang1, Cody Eric Bünger, Yanqun Zhang, Ebbe Stender Hansen.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to investigate whether or not post-op curve behaviour differs due to different choices of lowest instrumented vertebra (LIV) with reference to lumbar apical vertebra (LAV) in Lenke 3C and 6C scoliosis.
METHODS: We reviewed all the AIS cases surgically treated in our institution from 2002 through 2008. Inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) patients with Lenke 3C or 6C scoliosis who were treated with posterior pedicle screw-only constructs; (2) 2-year radiographic follow-up. All the included patients were categorized into three groups based on the relative position of LIV and LAV: Group A-the LIV was above the LAV; Group B-the LIV was at the LAV; Group C-the LIV was below the LAV. All the radiographic parameters were then compared among the groups. All image data were available in our picture archiving and communication systems. Standing anteroposterior (AP) and lateral digital radiographs were reviewed at four times (pre-op, post-op, 3-month and 2-year). In each standing AP radiograph, centre sacral vertical line (CSVL, the vertical line that bisects the proximal sacrum) was first drawn, followed by measuring T1-CSVL, LIV-CSVL, (LIV + 1)-CSVL, LAV-CSVL and thoracic AV-CSVL distance. In addition, the Cobb angles of major thoracic and lumbar curves were measured at the four times and the correction rates were then calculated.
RESULTS: Of the 278 patients reviewed, 40 met the inclusion criteria; 11 of these were included in Group A (LIV above LAV), another 11 in Group B (LIV at LAV) and the remaining 18 in Group C (LIV below LAV). At 2-year follow-up, the lumbar vertebrae such as LIV, LIV + 1 and LAV were all more deviated than before surgery in Group A (LIV above LAV), whereas in Group B and C (LIV at and below LAV) they were all less deviated than before surgery. No significant differences were found in thoracic or lumbar correction rate, global coronal balance and incidence rate of trunk shift among the three groups.
CONCLUSION: In conclusion, in Lenke 3C and 6C scoliosis, post-op lumbar curve behaviour differs due to different choices of LIV with reference to LAV, that is, the deviation of lumbar curve improves when the LIV is either at or below the LAV but deteriorates when the LIV is above the LAV. Although the greatest correction occurs when the LIV is below the LAV, choosing LAV as LIV can still be the optimal option in certain cases, since it can yield similar correction while preserving more lumbar mobility and growth potential.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22057393      PMCID: PMC3366136          DOI: 10.1007/s00586-011-2058-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Spine J        ISSN: 0940-6719            Impact factor:   3.134


  18 in total

1.  Lumbar curve response in type II idiopathic scoliosis after posterior instrumentation of the thoracic curve.

Authors:  B S Richards
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1992-08       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  Preventing decompensation in King type II curves treated with Cotrel-Dubousset instrumentation. Strict guidelines for selective thoracic fusion.

Authors:  L G Lenke; K H Bridwell; C Baldus; K Blanke
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1992-08       Impact factor: 3.468

3.  Surgical treatment of double major scoliosis. Improvement of the lumbar curve after fusion of the thoracic curve.

Authors:  D F Large; W G Doig; D R Dickens; I P Torode; W G Cole
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  1991-01

4.  Longitudinal changes in trunkal balance after selective fusion of King II curves in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  R Frez; J C Cheng; E M Wong
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2000-06-01       Impact factor: 3.468

5.  Assessment of two novel surgical positions for the reduction of scoliotic deformities: lateral leg displacement and hip torsion.

Authors:  Christopher Driscoll; Carl-Eric Aubin; Hubert Labelle; Jean Dansereau
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-04-28       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  Coronal and sagittal balance in surgically treated adolescent idiopathic scoliosis with the King II curve pattern. A review of 67 consecutive cases having selective thoracic arthrodesis.

Authors:  S E McCance; F Denis; J E Lonstein; R B Winter
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1998-10-01       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  Coronal decompensation produced by Cotrel-Dubousset "derotation" maneuver for idiopathic right thoracic scoliosis.

Authors:  K H Bridwell; J W McAllister; R R Betz; G Huss; M Clancy; P L Schoenecker
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1991-07       Impact factor: 3.468

8.  Factors involved in the decision to perform a selective versus nonselective fusion of Lenke 1B and 1C (King-Moe II) curves in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  Peter O Newton; Frances D Faro; Lawrence G Lenke; Randal R Betz; David H Clements; Thomas G Lowe; Thomas R Haher; Andrew A Merola; Linda P D'Andrea; Michelle Marks; Dennis R Wenger
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2003-10-15       Impact factor: 3.468

9.  The Lenke classification of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: how it organizes curve patterns as a template to perform selective fusions of the spine.

Authors:  Lawrence G Lenke; Charles C Edwards; Keith H Bridwell
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2003-10-15       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 10.  Selective thoracic fusion for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis with C modifier lumbar curves: 2- to 16-year radiographic and clinical results.

Authors:  Charles C Edwards; Lawrence G Lenke; Michael Peelle; Brenda Sides; Anthony Rinella; Keith H Bridwell
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2004-03-01       Impact factor: 3.468

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.