A Noelle Larson1, Fady J Baky2, Tricia St Hilaire3, Jeff Pawelek4, David L Skaggs5, John B Emans6, Joshua M Pahys7. 1. Mayo Clinic, 200 First St SW, Rochester, MN 55905, USA. Electronic address: Larson.Noelle@mayo.edu. 2. Mayo Clinic, 200 First St SW, Rochester, MN 55905, USA. 3. Children's Spine Foundation, P.O. Box 397, Valley Forge, PA 19481, USA. 4. Growing Spine Foundation, 555 East Wells Street, Suite 1100, Milwaukee, WI 53202, USA. 5. Children's Hospital Los Angeles, 4650 Sunset Blvd, Los Angeles, CA 90027, USA. 6. Children's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 300 Longwood Ave, Boston, MA 02115, USA. 7. Shriners Hospital for Children, 3551 N Broad St, Philadelphia, PA 19140, USA.
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of prospectively collected data. OBJECTIVE: To compare the use of spine-based versus rib-based implants for the treatment of early-onset scoliosis (EOS) in the setting of rib fusions. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Treatment for severe early-onset spinal deformity with rib fusions includes growing spine devices with proximal rib or spine anchors. The results of treatment, however, have not been compared between spine-based versus rib-based proximal anchors. METHODS: 169 patients with rib fusions treated with rib-based or spine-based constructs and minimum two-year follow-up were included. Sixteen patients were treated with proximal spine-based anchors and 153 with proximal rib-based devices (VEPTRs). Overall, 104 of the patients with rib-based fixation underwent thoracoplasty at the index surgery. We evaluated change in T1-T12 and T1-S1 height, coronal Cobb angle, kyphosis, and number of lengthening/revision surgeries. RESULTS: Kyphosis increased a mean of 7° in the rib-based group and decreased a mean of 20 degrees in the spine-based group (p = .002). Major Cobb angle decreased in both groups (p < .0001); however, the spine-based group had greater Cobb angle improvement (24 vs. 11 degrees, p = .04). From implant and lengthening of distraction devices, there was a mean 3.3-cm (22%) increase in T1-T12 height and a mean of 8.0 lengthenings in the rib-based group compared with a 5.7-cm increase and 6.3 lengthening surgeries in the spine-based group. Patients with rib-based constructs had a mean of 11 total procedures, whereas spine-based patients had a mean of 8. CONCLUSIONS: Patients underwent a mean of eight lengthening surgeries before final fusion or cessation of lengthening with a modest 2.3-cm increase in T1-T12 height. Compared with proximal rib anchors, proximal spine anchors controlled kyphosis and improved Cobb angle correction for early-onset scoliosis with rib fusions.
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of prospectively collected data. OBJECTIVE: To compare the use of spine-based versus rib-based implants for the treatment of early-onset scoliosis (EOS) in the setting of rib fusions. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Treatment for severe early-onset spinal deformity with rib fusions includes growing spine devices with proximal rib or spine anchors. The results of treatment, however, have not been compared between spine-based versus rib-based proximal anchors. METHODS: 169 patients with rib fusions treated with rib-based or spine-based constructs and minimum two-year follow-up were included. Sixteen patients were treated with proximal spine-based anchors and 153 with proximal rib-based devices (VEPTRs). Overall, 104 of the patients with rib-based fixation underwent thoracoplasty at the index surgery. We evaluated change in T1-T12 and T1-S1 height, coronal Cobb angle, kyphosis, and number of lengthening/revision surgeries. RESULTS:Kyphosis increased a mean of 7° in the rib-based group and decreased a mean of 20 degrees in the spine-based group (p = .002). Major Cobb angle decreased in both groups (p < .0001); however, the spine-based group had greater Cobb angle improvement (24 vs. 11 degrees, p = .04). From implant and lengthening of distraction devices, there was a mean 3.3-cm (22%) increase in T1-T12 height and a mean of 8.0 lengthenings in the rib-based group compared with a 5.7-cm increase and 6.3 lengthening surgeries in the spine-based group. Patients with rib-based constructs had a mean of 11 total procedures, whereas spine-based patients had a mean of 8. CONCLUSIONS:Patients underwent a mean of eight lengthening surgeries before final fusion or cessation of lengthening with a modest 2.3-cm increase in T1-T12 height. Compared with proximal rib anchors, proximal spine anchors controlled kyphosis and improved Cobb angle correction for early-onset scoliosis with rib fusions.
Authors: Robert M Campbell; Melvin D Smith; Thomas C Mayes; John A Mangos; Donna B Willey-Courand; Nusret Kose; Ricardo F Pinero; Marden E Alder; Hoa L Duong; Jennifer L Surber Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2003-03 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: John B Emans; Jean François Caubet; Claudia L Ordonez; Edward Y Lee; Michelle Ciarlo Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2005-09-01 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Robert F Murphy; Alice Moisan; Derek M Kelly; William C Warner; Tamekia L Jones; Jeffrey R Sawyer Journal: J Pediatr Orthop Date: 2016-06 Impact factor: 2.324
Authors: Hemal P Mehta; Brian D Snyder; Stephen R Baldassarri; Melissa J Hayward; Michael J Giuffrida; Vahid Entezari; Andrew C Jackson Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2010-01-15 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Ozgur Dede; Etsuro K Motoyama; Charles I Yang; Rebecca L Mutich; Stephen A Walczak; Austin J Bowles; Vincent F Deeney Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2014-08-06 Impact factor: 5.284