Literature DB >> 33486626

Predictive factors for correction rate in severe idiopathic scoliosis (Cobb angle ≥ 90°): an analysis of 128 patients.

Yuki Mihara1,2, Weng Hong Chung1, Siti Mariam Mohamad1, Chee Kidd Chiu1, Chris Yin Wei Chan1, Mun Keong Kwan3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Knowledge on the factors affecting the correction rate (CR) aids in the surgical planning among severe idiopathic scoliosis (IS) patients. This study aimed to investigate the independent factors affecting CR among patients with severe IS (Cobb angle ≥ 90°) who underwent single-staged posterior spinal fusion (PSF).
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 128 severe IS patients who underwent single-staged PSF. Factors including age, height, weight, body mass index, Risser sign, Lenke subtypes, preoperative major Cobb angle, side bending major Cobb angle, side bending flexibility (SBF), motion segments of the major curve, AR curve, number of levels fused, screw density, operative time and postoperative major Cobb angle were analysed using linear regression analysis.
RESULTS: The mean age was 15.5 ± 4.5 years with mean Risser sign of 3.1 ± 1.6. The mean preoperative Cobb, SBF, postoperative Cobb and CR were 102.8 ± 12.3°, 37.5 ± 13.7%, 44.4 ± 13.5° and 57.2 ± 10.8%, respectively. From stepwise multiple linear regression analysis, SBF, Risser sign and AR curve were the independent predictive factors for CR, with R2 value of 0.345 (p < 0.001). CR can be predicted using the formula: 47.21 + (0.34 × SBF)-(1.47 × Risser sign) + (3.69 × AR), where AR = 1 and non-AR = 0.
CONCLUSION: The flexibility of the major curve, Risser sign and AR curve were the most important predictors for CR in a single-staged PSF among patients with severe IS.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Correction rate; Posterior spinal fusion; Predictive factor; Risser sign; Severe scoliosis; Side bending flexibility

Year:  2021        PMID: 33486626     DOI: 10.1007/s00586-020-06701-3

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


  18 in total

1.  Rationale behind the current state-of-the-art treatment of scoliosis (in the pedicle screw era).

Authors:  Lawrence G Lenke; Timothy R Kuklo; Stephen Ondra; David W Polly
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2008-05-01       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  Fixation points within the main thoracic curve: does more instrumentation produce greater curve correction and improved results?

Authors:  James O Sanders; Mohammad Diab; Stephens B Richards; Lawrence G Lenke; Charles E Johnston; John B Emans; Daniel J Sucato; Mark A Erickson; Keith H Bridwell; Richard E McCarthy; John F Sarwark; John P Dormans
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2011-10-01       Impact factor: 3.468

3.  Staged Anterior Release and Posterior Instrumentation in Correction of Severe Rigid Scoliosis (Cobb Angle >100 Degrees).

Authors:  Pankaj Kandwal; Ankur Goswami; G Vijayaraghavan; K R Subhash; Ashok Jaryal; B N Upendra; Arvind Jayaswal
Journal:  Spine Deform       Date:  2016-06-16

4.  Perioperative Outcome of Single Stage Posterior Spinal Fusion for Severe Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis (AIS) (Cobb Angle ≥90°): The Role of a Dual Attending Surgeon Strategy.

Authors:  Mun Keong Kwan; Chee Kidd Chiu; Mohd Shahnaz Hasan; Shun Herng Tan; Ling Hui Loh; Kye Sheng Yeo; Wei Hong Lee; Chris Yin Wei Chan
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2019-03-15       Impact factor: 3.468

5.  Comparison of 1-stage versus 2-stage anterior and posterior spinal fusion for severe and rigid idiopathic scoliosis--a randomized prospective study.

Authors:  Jianxiong Shen; Guixing Qiu; Yipeng Wang; Zhihai Zhang; Yu Zhao
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2006-10-15       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  Posterior fusion only for thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis of more than 80 degrees: pedicle screws versus hybrid instrumentation.

Authors:  Mario Di Silvestre; Georgios Bakaloudis; Francesco Lolli; Francesco Vommaro; Konstantinos Martikos; Patrizio Parisini
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2008-08-12       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  Is the lumbar modifier useful in surgical decision making?: defining two distinct Lenke 1A curve patterns.

Authors:  Firoz Miyanji; Jeff B Pawelek; Scott E Van Valin; Vidyadhar V Upasani; Peter O Newton
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2008-11-01       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 8.  Comparative analysis of pedicle screw versus hook instrumentation in posterior spinal fusion of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  Yongjung J Kim; Lawrence G Lenke; Samuel K Cho; Keith H Bridwell; Brenda Sides; Kathy Blanke
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2004-09-15       Impact factor: 3.468

9.  Is there an optimal upper instrumented vertebra (UIV) tilt angle to prevent post-operative shoulder imbalance and neck tilt in Lenke 1 and 2 adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) patients?

Authors:  M K Kwan; C Y W Chan
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-03-28       Impact factor: 3.134

10.  Treatment of thoracic scoliosis: are monoaxial thoracic pedicle screws the best form of fixation for correction?

Authors:  Baron S Lonner; Joshua D Auerbach; Oheneba Boachie-Adjei; Suken A Shah; Naobumu Hosogane; Peter O Newton
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2009-04-15       Impact factor: 3.468

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.