PURPOSE: This study aimed to determine (1) does vertebral body tethering (VBT) produce differential growth modulation in individual vertebrae in patients with idiopathic scoliosis, (2) does VBT change disc shape, and (3) does VBT affect total spine length? METHODS: Patients with idiopathic scoliosis treated with VBT of the main thoracic curve and minimum 2-year follow-up were included. Vertebrae and discs were categorized as uninstrumented proximal thoracic, instrumented main thoracic, or uninstrumented thoracolumbar-lumbar. The left- and right-sided heights of each vertebra and disc were measured on subsequent radiographs to assess for differential growth. T1-T12 thoracic and T1-S1 thoracolumbar growth velocities were compared with standardized reference data. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients (764 vertebrae and 807 discs) were analyzed. The average major curve magnitude improved from 46° ± 11° to 17° ± 11° at 2-year follow-up. Differential growth was observed in MT vertebrae, in which the left/concave side grew 2.0 ± 2.2 mm compared with 1.5 ± 2.3 mm on the right/convex (tethered) side (p < 0.001). Differential height changes were observed for all discs, but were most pronounced in instrumented MT discs, in which the right/convex sides decreased by an average of 1.2 mm each, compared with no significant height change on the left/concave side. Total spinal growth velocities were not significantly different from standard reference data. CONCLUSION: Vertebral body tethering limits convex spinal growth as designed while permitting concave growth. Curve correction results from differential vertebral growth and decreased convex disc height. Overall spinal growth continues at the expected rate. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV case series.
PURPOSE: This study aimed to determine (1) does vertebral body tethering (VBT) produce differential growth modulation in individual vertebrae in patients with idiopathic scoliosis, (2) does VBT change disc shape, and (3) does VBT affect total spine length? METHODS: Patients with idiopathic scoliosis treated with VBT of the main thoracic curve and minimum 2-year follow-up were included. Vertebrae and discs were categorized as uninstrumented proximal thoracic, instrumented main thoracic, or uninstrumented thoracolumbar-lumbar. The left- and right-sided heights of each vertebra and disc were measured on subsequent radiographs to assess for differential growth. T1-T12 thoracic and T1-S1 thoracolumbar growth velocities were compared with standardized reference data. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients (764 vertebrae and 807 discs) were analyzed. The average major curve magnitude improved from 46° ± 11° to 17° ± 11° at 2-year follow-up. Differential growth was observed in MT vertebrae, in which the left/concave side grew 2.0 ± 2.2 mm compared with 1.5 ± 2.3 mm on the right/convex (tethered) side (p < 0.001). Differential height changes were observed for all discs, but were most pronounced in instrumented MT discs, in which the right/convex sides decreased by an average of 1.2 mm each, compared with no significant height change on the left/concave side. Total spinal growth velocities were not significantly different from standard reference data. CONCLUSION: Vertebral body tethering limits convex spinal growth as designed while permitting concave growth. Curve correction results from differential vertebral growth and decreased convex disc height. Overall spinal growth continues at the expected rate. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV case series.
Authors: Amer F Samdani; Robert J Ames; Jeff S Kimball; Joshua M Pahys; Harsh Grewal; Glenn J Pelletier; Randal R Betz Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2014-09-15 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Peter O Newton; Kevin B Fricka; Steven S Lee; Christine L Farnsworth; Tyler G Cox; Andrew T Mahar Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2002-04-01 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: John T Braun; James W Ogilvie; Ephraim Akyuz; Darrel S Brodke; Kent N Bachus Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2006-06-01 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Amer F Samdani; Robert J Ames; Jeff S Kimball; Joshua M Pahys; Harsh Grewal; Glenn J Pelletier; Randal R Betz Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2014-12-16 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: Peter O Newton; Christine L Farnsworth; Frances D Faro; Andrew T Mahar; Tim R Odell; Fazir Mohamad; Eric Breisch; Kevin Fricka; Vidyadhar V Upasani; David Amiel Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2008-04-01 Impact factor: 3.468