Sebastian Lippross1,2, Antonia Grages1, Katja A Lueders1, Lena Braunschweig1, Friederike Austein3, Konstantinos Tsaknakis1, Heiko M Lorenz1, Anna K Hell4. 1. Department of Trauma, Orthopaedic and Plastic Surgery, Investigations Performed At Pediatric Orthopaedics, University Medical Center Goettingen, Robert-Koch-Str. 40, 37075, Goettingen, Germany. 2. Department of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Germany. 3. Department of Radiology and Neuroradiology, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Germany. 4. Department of Trauma, Orthopaedic and Plastic Surgery, Investigations Performed At Pediatric Orthopaedics, University Medical Center Goettingen, Robert-Koch-Str. 40, 37075, Goettingen, Germany. anna.hell@med.uni-goettingen.de.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Growth-friendly spinal implants (GFSI) were established for scoliotic children as an interim solution until definite spinal fusion could be performed during puberty. While deformity control was clearly proven, the effects on vertebral shape and morphology are still unclear. Our prospective study assesses the effect of GFSI with continuous distraction on vertebral body shape and volume in SMA children in comparison with previously untreated age-matched SMA patients. METHODS: Cohort I (n = 19, age 13.2 years) were SMA patients without prior surgical scoliosis treatment. Cohort II (n = 24, age 12.4 years) were children, who had continuous spinal distraction with GFSI for 4.5 years. Radiographic measurements and computed tomography (CT) 3D volume rendering were performed before definite spinal fusion. For cohort II, additional radiographs were analyzed before the first surgical implantation of GFSI, after surgery and every year thereafter. RESULTS: Our analysis revealed decreased depth and volume in scoliotic patients with prior GFSI compared to scoliotic patients without prior implants. This difference was significant for the lower thoracic and entire lumbar spine. Vertebral body height and pedicle size were unchanged between the two cohorts. CONCLUSION: CT data showed volume reduction in the vertebral body in scoliotic children after GFSI treatment. This effect was more severe in the lumbar and lower thoracic area. While vertebral height was identical in both groups, vertebral depth was reduced in the GFSI-treated group. Reduced vertebral depth and altered vertebral morphology should be considered before instrumenting the spine in previously treated scoliotic SMA children. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III: Diagnostic: individual cross-sectional studies with consistently applied reference standard and blinding.
PURPOSE: Growth-friendly spinal implants (GFSI) were established for scoliotic children as an interim solution until definite spinal fusion could be performed during puberty. While deformity control was clearly proven, the effects on vertebral shape and morphology are still unclear. Our prospective study assesses the effect of GFSI with continuous distraction on vertebral body shape and volume in SMA children in comparison with previously untreated age-matched SMA patients. METHODS: Cohort I (n = 19, age 13.2 years) were SMA patients without prior surgical scoliosis treatment. Cohort II (n = 24, age 12.4 years) were children, who had continuous spinal distraction with GFSI for 4.5 years. Radiographic measurements and computed tomography (CT) 3D volume rendering were performed before definite spinal fusion. For cohort II, additional radiographs were analyzed before the first surgical implantation of GFSI, after surgery and every year thereafter. RESULTS: Our analysis revealed decreased depth and volume in scoliotic patients with prior GFSI compared to scoliotic patients without prior implants. This difference was significant for the lower thoracic and entire lumbar spine. Vertebral body height and pedicle size were unchanged between the two cohorts. CONCLUSION: CT data showed volume reduction in the vertebral body in scoliotic children after GFSI treatment. This effect was more severe in the lumbar and lower thoracic area. While vertebral height was identical in both groups, vertebral depth was reduced in the GFSI-treated group. Reduced vertebral depth and altered vertebral morphology should be considered before instrumenting the spine in previously treated scoliotic SMA children. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III: Diagnostic: individual cross-sectional studies with consistently applied reference standard and blinding.
Authors: Eugenio Mercuri; Richard S Finkel; Francesco Muntoni; Brunhilde Wirth; Jacqueline Montes; Marion Main; Elena S Mazzone; Michael Vitale; Brian Snyder; Susana Quijano-Roy; Enrico Bertini; Rebecca Hurst Davis; Oscar H Meyer; Anita K Simonds; Mary K Schroth; Robert J Graham; Janbernd Kirschner; Susan T Iannaccone; Thomas O Crawford; Simon Woods; Ying Qian; Thomas Sejersen Journal: Neuromuscul Disord Date: 2017-11-23 Impact factor: 4.296
Authors: Brett T Allaire; M Clara DePaolis Kaluza; Alexander G Bruno; Elizabeth J Samelson; Douglas P Kiel; Dennis E Anderson; Mary L Bouxsein Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2016-10-18 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: Hemal P Mehta; Brian D Snyder; Natasha N Callender; Carissa L Bellardine; Andrew C Jackson Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2006-11-01 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Michelle Perrone; Robin Orr; Wayne Hing; Nikki Milne; Rodney Pope Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2018-11-12 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Heiko M Lorenz; Batoul Badwan; Marina M Hecker; Konstantinos Tsaknakis; Katharina Groenefeld; Lena Braunschweig; Anna K Hell Journal: JB JS Open Access Date: 2017-11-28
Authors: Sebastian Lippross; Paul Girmond; Katja A Lüders; Friederike Austein; Lena Braunschweig; Stefan Lüders; Konstantinos Tsaknakis; Heiko M Lorenz; Anna K Hell Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2021-05-14 Impact factor: 4.241