Literature DB >> 30801282

Is It Possible to Correct Congenital Spinal Deformity Associated With a Tethered Cord Without Prophylactic Intradural Detethering?

Huiren Tao1, Kai Yang, Tao Li, Weizhou Yang, Chaoshuai Feng, Huan Li, Wei Su, Chunguang Duan.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Patients who have a congenital spinal deformity with a tethered cord generally are treated with prophylactic intradural detethering before deformity correction. However, the detethering procedure carries substantial risk, and it is not clear whether deformity correction can be performed without detethering. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: To determine the (1) correction rate, (2) proportion of patients who experienced complications after surgery, and (3) neurological status after recovery from surgery in a group of patients with congenital spinal deformity and a tethered cord who were treated either with posterior spinal fusion only (PSF), pedicle-subtraction osteotomy (PSO), or a vertebral column resection (VCR), based on an algorithmic approach.
METHODS: Between 2006 and 2016, we treated 50 patients surgically for a congenital spinal deformity and a tethered cord. We defined a congenital spinal deformity as one that was caused by failure of vertebral segmentation, failure of vertebral formation, or both, and we made the diagnosis of a tethered cord based on a conus medullaris lower than L2 level, or a diameter of the filum terminale greater than 2 mm, as shown on magnetic resonance image. Of those, nine patients were lost to followup before the 2-year minimum, leaving 41 for analysis at a mean followup of 47 months (range, 24 to 92 months) in this single-institution retrospective study. The treatment algorithm involved one of three approaches: PSF, PSO, or VCR. A total of 15 patients underwent PSF; we used this approach for patients with moderate curves (Cobb angle < 80°) and intact neurological status both previously and during a bending and traction test. Eleven patients underwent PSO; we performed PSO when patients had neurological symptoms (in daily life or during the traction/bending test) and a magnitude of the curve less than 80°. Finally, 15 patients underwent VCR, which we used in patients with a magnitude of the curve more than 80° and/or flexibility less than 20%, with/without neurological symptoms. No patient in any group underwent intradural detethering. We report on the correction rate, defined as the ratio between the corrected magnitude and preoperative magnitude of a curve at a given postoperative time point (correction rate = 1- (Cobb angle at a given time point/preoperative Cobb angle) x 100%); complications, that is, postoperative/recurrent neurological symptoms, cerebrospinal fluid leakage, infection, blood loss > 5000 mL, as determined by chart review performed by an individual not directly involved in patient care; and a detailed neurological exam, including evaluations of sensory function, extremity muscle strength, pain, gait, physiological reflexes, and pathological signs, both before surgery and at most recent followup, as performed by the surgeon. All neurologically symptomatic patients were evaluated with a neurologic scoring system.
RESULTS: The overall mean ± SD correction rate in this series was 63% ± 14%. It was 70% ± 12% in the PSF group, 64% ± 17% in the PSO group, and 56% ± 12% in the VCR group. Seven patients in those three groups experienced major complications, including blood loss more than 5000 mL, temporary neurological symptoms, cerebrospinal fluid leakage, and infection. The most severe complications included one patient in the VCR group who had temporarily decreased strength in the lower limb, and one patient in the PSO group with temporary numbness in the lower limb. Finally, no patients in PSF group had postoperative neurological complications, and all patients with neurological symptoms in the PSO/VCR group improved to varying degrees. For neurologically symptomatic patients in PSO group (n = 6), the neurological score improved slightly, from 22.5 ± 1.9 preoperatively to 24.2 ± 0.8 at the most recent followup (p = 0.024) with a mean difference of 1.7. For neurologically symptomatic patients in VCR group (n = 10), the neurological score improved slightly from 23.1 ± 1.1 preoperatively to 24.2 ± 0.6 at most recent followup (p = 0.009) with a mean difference of 1.1.
CONCLUSIONS: Congenital spinal deformity with a tethered cord may be treated without prophylactic intradural detethering. In the current series treated according to this treatment algorithm, good correction and neurological improvement were achieved, and few complications occurred. However, such a small series cannot prove the safety of this treatment; for that, larger, multicenter studies are necessary. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic study.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30801282      PMCID: PMC6999982          DOI: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000000652

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  19 in total

1.  Progressive kyphoscoliosis associated with tethered cord treated by posterior vertebral column resection: a case report.

Authors:  Morio Matsumoto; Kota Watanabe; Takashi Tsuji; Ken Ishii; Hironari Takaishi; Masaya Nakamura; Yoshiaki Toyama; Kazuhiro Chiba
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2009-12-15       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  The effect of tethered cord release on scoliosis in myelomeningocele.

Authors:  K Pierz; J Banta; J Thomson; N Gahm; J Hartford
Journal:  J Pediatr Orthop       Date:  2000 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.324

Review 3.  Congenital scoliosis: a review and update.

Authors:  Daniel Hedequist; John Emans
Journal:  J Pediatr Orthop       Date:  2007 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.324

Review 4.  Management of concomitant scoliosis and tethered cord syndrome in non-spina bifida pediatric population.

Authors:  Kaan Yaltırık; Najib E El Tecle; Matthew J Pierson; Aki Puryear; Basar Atalay; Samer K Elbabaa
Journal:  Childs Nerv Syst       Date:  2017-07-10       Impact factor: 1.475

Review 5.  Pathophysiology of tethered cord syndrome.

Authors:  S Yamada; R P Iacono; T Andrade; G Mandybur; B S Yamada
Journal:  Neurosurg Clin N Am       Date:  1995-04       Impact factor: 2.509

6.  Introduction of a score system for the clinical evaluation of patients with spinal processes.

Authors:  J Klekamp; M Samii
Journal:  Acta Neurochir (Wien)       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 2.216

7.  A retrospective study of congenital scoliosis and associated cardiac and intraspinal abnormities in a Chinese population.

Authors:  Yong-tai Liu; Li-lin Guo; Zhuang Tian; Wen-ling Zhu; Bin Yu; Shu-yang Zhang; Gui-xing Qiu
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-05-01       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  Surgical Treatment of Congenital Scoliosis Associated With Tethered Cord by Thoracic Spine-shortening Osteotomy Without Cord Detethering.

Authors:  Jing-Hui Huang; Wei-Zhou Yang; Chao Shen; Michael S Chang; Huan Li; Zhuo-Jing Luo; Hui-Ren Tao
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2015-10-15       Impact factor: 3.468

9.  Pediatric tethered cord syndrome: response of scoliosis to untethering procedures. Clinical article.

Authors:  Matthew J McGirt; Vivek Mehta; Giannina Garces-Ambrossi; Oren Gottfried; Can Solakoglu; Ziya L Gokaslan; Amer Samdani; George I Jallo
Journal:  J Neurosurg Pediatr       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 2.375

View more
  4 in total

1.  CORR Insights®: Is It Possible to Correct Congenital Spinal Deformity Associated With a Tethered Cord Without Prophylactic Intradural Detethering?

Authors:  Kent A Reinker
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2019-07       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 2.  Is detethering necessary before deformity correction in congenital scoliosis associated with tethered cord syndrome: a meta-analysis of current evidence.

Authors:  Kaustubh Ahuja; Syed Ifthekar; Samarth Mittal; Gagandeep Yadav; P Venkata Sudhakar; Sitanshu Barik; Pankaj Kandwal
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2020-11-17       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Is it safe and effective to correct congenital scoliosis associated with multiple intraspinal anomalies without preliminary neurosurgical intervention?

Authors:  Ningning Yang; Ming Luo; Shixin Zhao; Lei Xia; Wengang Wang
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2021-03-12       Impact factor: 1.817

Review 4.  Surgical correction of pediatric spinal deformities with coexisting intraspinal pathology: A case report and literature review.

Authors:  Daphne Li; Douglas E Anderson; Russ P Nockels
Journal:  Surg Neurol Int       Date:  2021-08-03
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.