One stage or two? A cohort analysis of anterior-posterior spinal fusions for severe pediatric scoliosis

Severe (>100 Degrees) Thoracic Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis - A Comparison of Surgical Approaches

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective.

OBJECTIVE

Severe curves >100° in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) are rare and require careful operative planning. The aim of this study was to assess baseline, perioperative, and 2-year differences between anterior release with posterior instrumentation (AP), posterior instrumentation with posterior column osteotomies (P), and posterior instrumentation with 3-column vertebral osteotomies (VCR).

METHODS

Two scoliosis datasets were queried for primary cases of severe thoracic AIS (≥100°) with 2-year follow-up. Pre- and 2-year postoperative radiographic measures (2D and estimated 3D kyphosis), clinical measurements, and SRS-22 outcomes were compared between three approaches.

RESULTS

Sixty-one patients were included: 16 AP (26%), 38 P (62%), 7 VCR (11%). Average age was 14.4 ± 2.0 years; 75.4% were female. Preoperative thoracic curve magnitude (AP: 112°, P: 115°, VCR: 126°, P = 0.09) and T5-T12 kyphosis (AP: 38°, P: 59°, VCR: 70°, P = 0.057) were similar between groups. Estimated 3D kyphosis was less in AP vs P (-12° vs 4°, P = 0.016). Main thoracic curves corrected to 36° in AP vs 49° and 48° for P and VCR, respectively (P = 0.02). Change in estimated 3D kyphosis was greater in AP vs P and VCR (34° vs 13°, P = 0.009; 34° vs 7°, P = 0.046). One incomplete spinal cord injury had residual deficits (P; 1/61, 1.6%). All SRS-22 domains improved postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

All approaches obtained satisfactory coronal and sagittal correction, but AP had smaller residual coronal deformity and greater kyphosis restoration than the other approaches. This information may help inform the decision of whether to include an anterior release for large thoracic AIS curves.

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis: Does Anterior-Posterior Spinal Fusion Still have a Role in Severe Thoracic Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis?

Background

Debate exists as to whether anterior-posterior spinal fusion (APSF), rather than posterior-only spinal fusion (PSF), provides benefit for treating severe thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). This systematic review and meta-analysis compare (1) Cobb angle correction, (2) complication and reoperation rate, (3) pulmonary function, (4) number of fused segments, and 5) patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in both groups.

Methods

Electronic databases were searched to identify studies that met the following inclusion criteria: comparative studies (level 3 or above), severe thoracic curves (≥ 70°), age ≤ 16, AIS aetiology, Lenke 1-4 curves and follow-up ≥ 1 year for ≥ 95% of patient population. Literature was graded for quality and bias using GRADE and MINORS criteria.

Results

Eight studies were included, defined by GRADE as low or moderate level evidence. Three studies showed superior curve correction in the APSF group; however, the meta-analysis showed no significant difference in curve correction between groups (95% CI - 3.45-12.96, P = 0.26). There were more complications in the APSF group, without statistical significance (95% CI 0.53-3.39, P = 0.54; I 2 = 0%, P = 0.78). There were no re-operations in either group. Two studies reported pulmonary function; one showed better function in the APSF group, the other better function in the PSF group. One study showed fewer fused segments in the APSF group, however, no significance was observed in the meta-analysis (95%CI - 1.65-0.31, P = 0.18). Three studies reported PROMs with no differences reported between groups.

Conclusions

APSF and PSF have been found to have comparable results. The present evidence cannot support recommendations for guidelines on future practice with regards to effect on curve correction, complications, re-operations, pulmonary function or PROMs.

Level of evidence

Level III, Systematic review of Level-III studies.

Posterior Multisegment Apical Convex plus Concave Intervertebral Release Combined with Posterior Column Osteotomy for the Treatment of Rigid Thoracic/Thoracolumbar Scoliosis

BACKGROUND

Intervertebral release (IVR) in the apical region is critical for full release of a rigid spine. Previous studies have mainly reported IVR techniques using an anterior approach or posterior apical convex IVR. We first report the surgical procedure of posterior multisegment apical convex plus concave IVR combined with posterior column osteotomy (PCO) for treating rigid thoracic/thoracolumbar scoliosis.

METHODS

This study retrospectively analyzed clinical, radiologic outcomes and technique notes of 18 patients with rigid scoliosis treated with posterior multisegment convex plus concave IVR combined with PCO.

RESULTS

The preoperative, postoperative, and final follow-up mean sagittal Cobb angles of the main curve were 75.2° (58.7°-110.2°), 18.4° (9°-35.1°), and 19.0° (8.2°-36.3°), respectively. The mean correction rate was 75.3% (66.7%-86.7%). In cases of thoracolumbar kyphosis, the preoperative, postoperative, and final follow-up mean sagittal Cobb angles were 45.7° (40.5°-52.6°), 18.8° (10.2°-27.5°), and 19.8° (11.1°-29°), respectively. The mean correction rate was 57% (42.1%-72.6%). The mean axial vertebral rotation (AVR) in the IVR region was 24.4° (14.3°-46.3°) preoperatively and was corrected to 10.9° (10.9°-26.6°) postoperatively. The mean correction rate for AVR was 55.9% (41.1%-78.6%). The coronal and sagittal Cobb angles and AVR postoperatively were significantly lower than those preoperatively (P < 0.001). This case series reported 2 cases of pleural effusion and 1 case of wound infection.

CONCLUSIONS

Single posterior multilevel apical convex plus concave IVR combined with PCO is a safe and effective surgical method for treating rigid thoracic/thoracolumbar scoliosis that does not need 3-column osteotomy.