Literature DB >> 26909841

Clavicle Chest Cage Angle Difference: Is It a Radiographic and Clinical Predictor of Postoperative Shoulder Imbalance in Lenke I Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis?

Xiao Han1, Zhen Liu, Yong Qiu, Shifu Sha, Huang Yan, Mengran Jin, Zezhang Zhu.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: A retrospective study.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of preoperative clavicle chest cage angle difference (CCAD) on postoperative radiographic shoulder imbalance, cosmetic shoulder balance, patient's satisfaction, and surgeon's fulfillment in Lenke I adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: CCAD is a novel predictor of postoperative radiographic shoulder imbalance in AIS. However, radiographic shoulder balance does not always correspond to cosmetic shoulder balance.
METHODS: Forty-four Lenke I AIS patients treated with posterior spinal fusion with a minimum 2-year follow-up were analyzed. Shoulder height difference (SHD) and CCAD were measured on anteroposterior standing radiographs. The inner shoulder height (SHi) and the outer shoulder height (SHo) were measured using the patients' photographs. The patients' satisfaction and the surgeons' fulfillment were evaluated using a questionnaire. A receiver operative characteristic curve analysis was performed to explore the threshold values of preoperative CCAD in the prediction of the final follow-up radiographic shoulder imbalance, patients' satisfaction, and surgeons' fulfillment.
RESULTS: At the final follow-up, the preoperative CCAD was significantly greater in patients with unbalanced shoulders (SHD ≥1 cm). For cosmetic shoulder balance at the final follow-up, there was no significant difference in preoperative CCAD between Group 1i (SHi ≥1 cm, n = 14) and Group 2i (SHi <1 cm, n = 30), and the preoperative CCAD was also similar between Group 1o (SHo ≥1 cm, n = 17) and Group 2o (SHo <1 cm, n = 27). For patients' satisfaction and surgeons' fulfillment, the preoperative CCAD was significantly greater in patients with unsatisfied outcomes. The threshold value of preoperative CCAD to predict the final follow-up radiographic shoulder imbalance, patients' satisfaction, and surgeons' fulfillment was 5.5°.
CONCLUSION: CCAD is a good radiographic predictor for postoperative radiographic shoulder imbalance in Lenke I AIS patients. Moreover, it is also associated with the patients' satisfaction and surgeons' fulfillment postoperatively. However, CCAD cannot predict postoperative cosmetic shoulder balance. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26909841     DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000001521

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


  4 in total

1.  Postoperative shoulder imbalance in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: risk factors and predictive index.

Authors:  Yilin Yang; Mingyuan Yang; Jian Zhao; Yinchuan Zhao; Changwei Yang; Ming Li
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2019-04-04       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Incidence and risk factors for postoperative shoulder imbalance in scoliosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  ShengFei Zhang; Liang Zhang; XinMin Feng; HuiLin Yang
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2017-09-09       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Hooks at the Upper Instrumented Vertebra Can Adjust Postoperative Shoulder Balance in Patients with Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis: 5 Years or More of Follow-up.

Authors:  Shingo Kuroya; Tsutomu Akazawa; Toshiaki Kotani; Tsuyoshi Sakuma; Shohei Minami; Yoshiaki Torii; Tasuku Umehara; Masahiro Iinuma; Kenichi Murakami; Sumihisa Orita; Kazuhide Inage; Yawara Eguchi; Kazuki Fujimoto; Yasuhiro Shiga; Junichi Nakamura; Gen Inoue; Masayuki Miyagi; Wataru Saito; Seiji Ohtori; Hisateru Niki
Journal:  Asian Spine J       Date:  2019-05-14

4.  Evaluation of the Radiographic Risk Factors of Postoperative Shoulder Imbalance in Adult Scoliosis.

Authors:  Wencan Ke; Bingjin Wang; Wenbin Hua; Kun Wang; Shuai Li; Cao Yang
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2022-06-09
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.