Literature DB >> 25510515

Anterior vertebral body tethering for immature adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: one-year results on the first 32 patients.

Amer F Samdani1, Robert J Ames, Jeff S Kimball, Joshua M Pahys, Harsh Grewal, Glenn J Pelletier, Randal R Betz.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: This retrospective chart review evaluates the clinical and radiographic outcomes of anterior vertebral body tethering (VBT) at 1-year follow-up. Anterior VBT offers a fusionless treatment option for skeletally immature patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. It is a growth-modulation technique, which utilizes patients' growth to attain progressive scoliosis correction. Numerous animal models support its promise; however, clinical data remain sparse.
METHODS: Clinical and radiographic data were retrospectively analyzed. We reviewed 32 patients who underwent thoracic VBT with a minimum one-year follow-up. Pertinent clinical and radiographic data were collected. ANOVA, Student's t test and Fisher's exact test were utilized to compare different time points.
RESULTS: 32 patients with thoracic idiopathic scoliosis (72 % female) with a minimum one-year follow-up were identified; mean age at surgery was 12 years. All patients were considered skeletally immature pre-operatively; mean Risser score 0.42, mean Sanders score 3.2. Patients underwent tethering of an average of 7.7 levels (range 7-11). Median blood loss was 100 cc. The mean pre-operative thoracic curve magnitude was 42.8° ± 8.0° which corrected to 21.0° ± 8.5° on first erect and 17.9° ± 11.4° at most recent. The pre-operative lumbar curve of 25.2° ± 7.3° demonstrated progressive correction (first erect = 18.0° ± 7.1°, 1 year = 12.6° ± 9.4°, p < 0.00001). Thoracic axial rotation measured 13.4° pre-operatively and 7.4° at the most recent measurement (p < 0.00001). One patient experienced prolonged atelectasis which required a bronchoscopy; otherwise, no major complications were observed.
CONCLUSIONS: Our early results indicate that anterior VBT is a safe and potentially effective treatment option for skeletally immature patients with idiopathic scoliosis. These patients experienced an improvement of their scoliosis with minimal major complications. However, longer term follow-up of this cohort will reveal the true benefits of this promising technique. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25510515     DOI: 10.1007/s00586-014-3706-z

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


  22 in total

1.  Preservation of thoracic kyphosis is critical to maintain lumbar lordosis in the surgical treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  Peter O Newton; Burt Yaszay; Vidyadhar V Upasani; Jeff B Pawelek; Tracey P Bastrom; Lawrence G Lenke; Thomas Lowe; Alvin Crawford; Randal Betz; Baron Lonner
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2010-06-15       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  Long-term magnetic resonance imaging follow-up demonstrates minimal transitional level lumbar disc degeneration after posterior spine fusion for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  Daniel W Green; Thomas W Lawhorne; Roger F Widmann; Christopher K Kepler; Caitlin Ahern; Douglas N Mintz; Bernard A Rawlins; Stephen W Burke; Oheneba Boachie-Adjei
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2011-11-01       Impact factor: 3.468

3.  Maturity assessment and curve progression in girls with idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  James O Sanders; Richard H Browne; Sharon J McConnell; Susan A Margraf; Timothy E Cooney; David N Finegold
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 5.284

4.  Brace-wear compliance in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  C V DiRaimondo; N E Green
Journal:  J Pediatr Orthop       Date:  1988 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.324

5.  Effects of intraoperative tensioning of an anterolateral spinal tether on spinal growth modulation in a porcine model.

Authors:  Peter O Newton; Christine L Farnsworth; Vidyadhar V Upasani; Reid C Chambers; Eric Varley; Shunji Tsutsui
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2011-01-15       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  Objective compliance of adolescent girls with idiopathic scoliosis in a dynamic SpineCor brace.

Authors:  Carol C Hasler; Stephanie Wietlisbach; Philippe Büchler
Journal:  J Child Orthop       Date:  2010-03-12       Impact factor: 1.548

Review 7.  Long-term outcomes after posterior spine fusion for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  Christopher K Kepler; Dennis S Meredith; Daniel W Green; Roger F Widmann
Journal:  Curr Opin Pediatr       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 2.856

8.  Asymmetrical flexible tethering of spine growth in an immature bovine model.

Authors:  Peter O Newton; Kevin B Fricka; Steven S Lee; Christine L Farnsworth; Tyler G Cox; Andrew T Mahar
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2002-04-01       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 9.  Surgical rates after observation and bracing for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: an evidence-based review.

Authors:  Lori A Dolan; Stuart L Weinstein
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2007-09-01       Impact factor: 3.468

10.  The objective measurement of spinal orthosis use for the treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  G P Nicholson; M W Ferguson-Pell; K Smith; M Edgar; T Morley
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2003-10-01       Impact factor: 3.468

View more
  38 in total

1.  Prediction outcomes for anterior vertebral body growth modulation surgery from discriminant spatiotemporal manifolds.

Authors:  William Mandel; Olivier Turcot; Dejan Knez; Stefan Parent; Samuel Kadoury
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2019-07-29       Impact factor: 2.924

2.  Defining the learning curve in CT-guided navigated thoracoscopic vertebral body tethering.

Authors:  Smitha Mathew; A Noelle Larson; D Dean Potter; Todd A Milbrandt
Journal:  Spine Deform       Date:  2021-05-18

3.  Learning curve for vertebral body tethering: analysis on 90 consecutive patients.

Authors:  Alice Baroncini; Per David Trobisch; Filippo Migliorini
Journal:  Spine Deform       Date:  2020-08-21

4.  Morphing electronics enable neuromodulation in growing tissue.

Authors:  Yuxin Liu; Jinxing Li; Shang Song; Jiheong Kang; Yuchi Tsao; Shucheng Chen; Vittorio Mottini; Kelly McConnell; Wenhui Xu; Yu-Qing Zheng; Jeffrey B-H Tok; Paul M George; Zhenan Bao
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2020-04-20       Impact factor: 54.908

Review 5.  Spinal growth tethering: indications and limits.

Authors:  Peter O Newton
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2020-01

6.  Early outcomes of spinal growth tethering for idiopathic scoliosis with a novel device: a prospective study with 2 years of follow-up.

Authors:  M Boudissa; A Eid; E Bourgeois; J Griffet; A Courvoisier
Journal:  Childs Nerv Syst       Date:  2017-03-21       Impact factor: 1.475

Review 7.  A comprehensive review of the diagnosis and management of congenital scoliosis.

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

8.  A Growth-Accommodating Implant for Paediatric Applications.

Authors:  Eric N Feins; Yuhan Lee; Eoin D O'Cearbhaill; Nikolay V Vasilyev; Shogo Shimada; Ingeborg Friehs; Douglas Perrin; Peter E Hammer; Haruo Yamauchi; Gerald Marx; Andrew Gosline; Veaceslav Arabagi; Jeffrey M Karp; Pedro J Del Nido
Journal:  Nat Biomed Eng       Date:  2017-10-10       Impact factor: 25.671

9.  Anterior vertebral body tethering shows mixed results at 2-year follow-up.

Authors:  Courtney E Baker; Gary M Kiebzak; Kevin M Neal
Journal:  Spine Deform       Date:  2020-10-28

10.  Thoracic paravertebral nerve catheter reduces postoperative opioid use for vertebral body tethering patients.

Authors:  Smitha Mathew; Todd A Milbrandt; D Dean Potter; A Noelle Larson
Journal:  Spine Deform       Date:  2021-07-15
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.