Literature DB >> 26487545

Predictive factors for a distal adjacent disorder with L3 as the lowest instrumented vertebra in Lenke 5C patients.

Kei Ando, Shiro Imagama, Zenya Ito, Kazuyoshi Kobayashi, Tetsuro Hida, Kenyu Ito, Akito Tsushima, Yoshimoto Ishikawa, Akiyuki Matsumoto, Yoshihiro Nishida, Naoki Ishiguro.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate what type of Lenke 5C patient benefits most from a fusion to L3 as the LIV.
METHODS: The subjects were 16 patients who underwent fusion surgery to L3 as the lowest instrumented vertebra (LIV), and who were then observed for a minimum of 2 years postoperatively. We considered an unsatisfactory radiologic outcome for the distal adjacent curve (DAD) to be an L3 or L4 tilt angle less than 10° or L3/4 disc wedging less than 10°. Patients were divided into 2 groups based on the radiologic outcome of the distal curve: the distal adjacent disorder+ (DAD+) and the distal adjacent disorder-(DAD-). We compared global balance, Cobb angles (thoracic and lumbar), L3 and L4 tilt angles and L3/4/5 disc angles between the 2 groups on preoperative, postoperative and final radiographs.
RESULTS: Seven patients (43.8 %) met the criteria for the DAD+ group. On preoperative radiographs, there was a significant difference in the L3/4 disc angle: the DAD+ group opened to the preoperative convex side (-2.1° ± 3.0°) and the DAD- group opened to the preoperative concave side (4.7° ± 5.1°). The standing L3- and L4-CSVL and the L4-CSVL under traction were significantly different.
CONCLUSIONS: In Lenke 5C patients who underwent fusion surgery to L3 as the LIV, preoperative LIV (L3), LIV + 1 (L4) translation and L3/4 disc angle on standing, plus LIV + 1 translation under traction were very important parameters correlating with postoperative global coronal balance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26487545     DOI: 10.1007/s00590-015-1712-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol        ISSN: 1633-8065


  23 in total

1.  Salvage and reconstructive surgery for spinal deformity using Cotrel-Dubousset instrumentation.

Authors:  R B Winter; F Denis; J E Lonstein; E Dezen
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1991-08       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 2.  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

3.  New anterior instrumentation for the management of thoracolumbar and lumbar scoliosis. Application of the Kaneda two-rod system.

Authors:  K Kaneda; Y Shono; S Satoh; K Abumi
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1996-05-15       Impact factor: 3.468

4.  Lowest instrumented vertebra selection for Lenke 5C scoliosis: a minimum 2-year radiographical follow-up.

Authors:  Yu Wang; Cody Eric Bünger; Yanqun Zhang; Chunsen Wu; Haisheng Li; Benny Dahl; Ebbe Stender Hansen
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2013-06-15       Impact factor: 3.468

5.  Solid rod short segment anterior fusion in thoracolumbar scoliosis.

Authors:  R M Bernstein; J E Hall
Journal:  J Pediatr Orthop B       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 1.041

6.  Outcome at 10 years after treatment for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  Mikkel O Andersen; Steen B Christensen; Karsten Thomsen
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2006-02-01       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  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

8.  The effect of Harrington instrumentation on the sagittal configuration and mobility of the spine in scoliosis.

Authors:  S Aaro; G Ohlén
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1983-09       Impact factor: 3.468

9.  The posterior approach for lumbar and thoracolumbar adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: posterior shortening and pedicle screws.

Authors:  Harry L Shufflebarger; Matthew J Geck; Cynthia E Clark
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2004-02-01       Impact factor: 3.468

10.  The Dwyer procedure in the treatment of idiopathic scoliosis. A 10-year follow-up review of 21 patients.

Authors:  R Kohler; O Galland; H Mechin; C R Michel; M Onimus
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1990-02       Impact factor: 3.468

View more
  3 in total

1.  Severe persistent coronal imbalance following instrumented posterior spinal fusion for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  Jason B Anari; Scott M LaValva; John M Flynn; Aaron M Tatad
Journal:  Spine Deform       Date:  2020-06-04

2.  Risk factors for persistent coronal imbalance or revision surgery following L3 LIV selection in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS).

Authors:  Scott M LaValva; Jason B Anari; John M Flynn
Journal:  Spine Deform       Date:  2021-01-13

3.  Criteria for Ending the Distal Fusion at the L3 Vertebra vs. L4 in Surgical Treatment of Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Patients with Lenke Type 3C, 5C, and 6C Curves: Results After Ten Years of Follow-up.

Authors:  Mehmet N Erdem; Sinan Karaca; Mehmet F Korkmaz; Meric Enercan; Mehmet Tezer; Ayhan N Kara; Azmi Hamzaoglu
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2018-05-01
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.