Literature DB >> 25645588

Parameters leading to a successful radiographic outcome following surgical treatment for Lenke 2 curves.

Heiko Koller1, Oliver Meier, Anna McClung, Wolfgang Hitzl, Michael Mayer, Daniel Sucato.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: In Lenke 2 curves, there are conflicting data when to include the PTC into the fusion. Studies focusing on Lenke 2 curves are scant. The number of patients with significant postoperative shoulder height difference (SHD) or trunk shift (TS) is as high as 30 % indicating further research. Therefore, the purpose of the current study was to improve understanding of curve resolution and shoulder balance following surgical correction of Lenke 2 curves as well as the identification of radiographic parameters predicting postoperative curve resolution, shoulder and trunk balance in perspective of inclusion/exclusion of the proximal thoracic curve (PTC).
METHODS: This is a retrospective study of a 158 Lenke 2 curves. Serial radiographs were analyzed for the main thoracic curve (MTC), PTC, and lumbar curve (LC), SHD, clavicle angle (CA), T-1 tilt, deviation of the central sacral vertical line (CSVL) off the C7 plumb line.Patients were stratified whether the PTC was included in the fusion (+PTC group, n = 60) or not (-PTC group, n = 98). Intergroup results were studied. Compensatory mechanisms for SHD were studied in detail. Adding-on distally was defined as an increase of the lowest instrumented vertebra adjacent disc angle (LIVDA) >3°. Stepwise regression analyses were performed to establish predictive radiographic parameters.
RESULTS: At follow-up averaging 24 months significant differences between the +PTC and -PTC group existed for the PTC (24° vs 28°, p < .01), PTC correction (42 vs 29 %, p < .01), rate of MTC-loss >5° (27 vs 53 %, p < .01), and spontaneous LC correction in patients with a selective thoracic fusion (STF) (80/93 %, p = .04). The number of patients with a new trunk shift (CSVL > 2 cm) was 9 (6 %): 7 in the -PTC vs 2 in the +PTC group (p = .03). Utilization of compensatory mechanisms (99 vs 83 %, p < .01) and adding-on (35 vs 20 %, p < .05) occurred more often in the +PTC vs the -PTC groups. Statistics showed postoperative SHD improvement in both the +PTC and -PTC groups. There were no significant differences regarding SHD, CA and T1-Tilt between groups. However, only in the -PTC group, a significant change between postoperative and follow-up SHD existed (p = .02). Statistics identified a preoperative 'left shoulder up' (p < .01) and CSVL (p = .03) predictive for follow-up SHD ≥1.5 cm. A statistical model only for the -PTC group showed 9 parameters highly predictive for a follow-up SHD ≥1.5 cm with highest prediction strength for a PTC >40° (p = .01), a preoperative 'left shoulder up' (p < .01) and anterior fusion (p = .02). To account for baseline differences between the +PTC and -PTC groups, 49 matched-pairs were studied. Postoperative differences remained significant between the +PTC and -PTC groups for the PTC (p < .01), MTC (p = .03) and the rate of loss of MTC >5° (p < .01).
CONCLUSION: Prediction of a successful surgical outcome for Lenke 2 curves depends on multiple variables, in particular a preoperative left shoulder up, preoperative PTC >40°, MTC correction, and surgical approach. Shoulder balance is not significantly different whether the PTC is included in the fusion or not. But, powerful compensation mechanisms utilized to balance shoulder in the -PTC group can impose changes of trunk alignment, main and compensatory lumbar curves.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25645588     DOI: 10.1007/s00586-015-3772-x

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


  24 in total

Review 1.  Adjacent segment disease after instrumented fusion for idiopathic scoliosis: review of current trends and controversies.

Authors:  Brice Ilharreborde; Etienne Morel; Keyvan Mazda; Mark B Dekutoski
Journal:  J Spinal Disord Tech       Date:  2009-10

2.  Taking the shoulders and pelvis into account in the preoperative classification of idiopathic scoliosis in adolescents and young adults (a constructive critique of King's and Lenke's systems of classification).

Authors:  Bergoin Maurice; Gennari Jean-Marie; Tallet Jean-Michel
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-07-16       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Changes of upper thoracic curve and shoulder balance in thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis treated by anterior selective thoracic fusion using VATS.

Authors:  Chong-Suh Lee; Sung-Soo Chung; Seong-Kee Shin; Yong-Serk Park; Sung-Jun Park; Kyung-Chung Kang
Journal:  J Spinal Disord Tech       Date:  2011-10

4.  Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a new classification to determine extent of spinal arthrodesis.

Authors:  L G Lenke; R R Betz; J Harms; K H Bridwell; D H Clements; T G Lowe; K Blanke
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 5.284

5.  Spontaneous proximal thoracic curve correction after isolated fusion of the main thoracic curve in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  T R Kuklo; L G Lenke; D S Won; E J Graham; F A Sweet; R R Betz; K H Bridwell; K M Blanke
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2001-09-15       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  Does anterior shoulder balance in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis correlate with posterior shoulder balance clinically and radiographically?

Authors:  Scott Yang; Eric Feuchtbaum; Brian C Werner; Woojin Cho; Vasantha Reddi; Vincent Arlet
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-07-28       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  Surgical assessment of the proximal thoracic curve in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  Panayiotis N Smyrnis; Nicholas Sekouris; George Papadopoulos
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2009-02-14       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  Long-term outcomes of anterior dual-rod instrumentation for thoracolumbar and lumbar curves in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a twelve to twenty-three-year follow-up study.

Authors:  Hideki Sudo; Manabu Ito; Kiyoshi Kaneda; Yasuhiro Shono; Kuniyoshi Abumi
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2013-04-17       Impact factor: 5.284

9.  Morphological differences in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a histological and ultrastructural investigation.

Authors:  Ingrid Sitte; Anton Kathrein; Kristian Pfaller; Florian Pedross; Miranda Klosterhuber; Richard Andreas Lindtner; Juliane Zenner; Luis Ferraris; Oliver Meier; Heiko Koller
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2013-09-01       Impact factor: 3.468

10.  The proximal thoracic curve in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: surgical strategy and management outcomes.

Authors:  Tarek Anwar Elfiky; Dino Samartzis; Wai-Yuen Cheung; Yat-Wa Wong; Keith D K Luk; Kenneth M C Cheung
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2011-12
View more
  4 in total

1.  Accurate prediction of spontaneous lumbar curve correction following posterior selective thoracic fusion in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis using logistic regression models and clinical rationale.

Authors:  H Koller; W Hitzl; M C Marks; P O Newton
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2019-06-24       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Predictors of shoulder level after spinal fusion in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  Jan Henrik Terheyden; Mark Wetterkamp; Georg Gosheger; Viola Bullmann; Ulf Liljenqvist; Tobias Lange; Albert Schulze Bövingloh; Tobias L Schulte
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2017-07-08       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Sinister! The high pre-op left shoulder is less likely to be radiographically balanced at 2 years post-op.

Authors:  Joshua T Bram; Nishank Mehta; John M Flynn; Jason B Anari; Keith D Baldwin; Burt Yaszay; Joshua M Pahys; Patrick J Cahill
Journal:  Spine Deform       Date:  2020-11-17

4.  Thoracic Curve Correction Ratio: An Objective Measure to Guide against Overcorrection of a Main Thoracic Curve in the Setting of a Structural Proximal Thoracic Curve.

Authors:  Matthew R Landrum; Andrew H Milby; Burt Yaszay; Stefan Parent; Susan E Nelson; Joshua M Pahys; Amer F Samdani; Anthony C Capraro; John M Flynn; Patrick J Cahill
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-03-11       Impact factor: 4.241

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.