Vertebral body tethering compared to posterior spinal fusion for skeletally immature adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients: preliminary results from a matched case-control study

Anterior vertebral body tethering shows clinically comparable shoulder balance outcomes to posterior spinal fusion

PURPOSE

Posterior spinal fusion (PSF) is the current gold standard in surgical treatment for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Vertebral body tethering (VBT) is a fusionless alternative. Shoulder balance is an important metric for outcomes and patient satisfaction. Here we compare shoulder balance outcomes between PSF and VBT.

METHODS

In this retrospective review, the pre-operative and post-operative absolute radiographic shoulder height (|RSH|) of 45 PSF patients were compared to 46 VBT patients. Mean values were compared and then collapsed into discrete groups (|RSH| GROUP) and compared. Patients were propensity score matched. Regression models based on pretest-posttest designs were used to compare procedure type on post-operative outcomes.

RESULTS

Pre-operatively there were no differences in |RSH| between PSF and VBT, however, at latest post-operative follow-up PSF maintained a larger |RSH| imbalance compared to VBT (0.91 cm vs 0.63 cm, p = 0.021). In an ANCOVA regression, PSF was associated with a larger |RSH| imbalance compared to VBT, F(1, 88) = 5.76, p = 0.019. An ordinal logistic regression found that the odds ratio of being in a worse |RSH| GROUP for PSF vs VBT is 2.788 (95% CI = 1.099 to 7.075), a statistically significant effect χ2(1) = 4.658, p = 0.031. Results were similar in subgroup analyses of Lenke 1 and Lenke 2 patients, though to less statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

While PSF was found to be associated with worse |RSH| outcomes, the actual numbers (2-3 mm) are unlikely to be clinically meaningful. Thus, in this analysis, VBT can be said to show comparable shoulder balance outcomes to PSF.

Vertebral body tethering for Lenke 1A curves: the lumbar modifier predicts less optimal outcomes

INTRODUCTION

The addition of the L4 "AR" and "AL" lumbar modifier for Lenke 1A idiopathic scoliosis (IS) has been shown to direct treatment in posterior spinal fusion; however, its utility in vertebral body tethering (VBT) has yet to be evaluated.

METHODS

A review of a prospective, multicenter database for VBT in IS was performed for patients with Lenke 1A deformities and a minimum of 2 years follow-up. Patients were categorized by their lumbar modifier (AR vs AL). Less optimal VBT outcome (LOVO) was defined as a final coronal curve > 35°, lumbar adding-on, or revision surgery for deformity progression or adding-on.

RESULTS

Ninety-nine patients met inclusion criteria (81% female, mean 12.6 years), with 55.6% being AL curves. Overall, there were 23 instances of tether breakage (23.3%) and 20 instances of LOVO (20.2%). There was a higher rate of LOVO in AR curves (31.8% vs 10.9%, P = 0.01). Patients with LOVO had greater preoperative deformity, greater apical translation, larger coronal deformity on first erect radiographs, and less coronal deformity correction. Failure to correct the deformity < 30° on first erect was associated with LOVO, as was LIV selection short of the last touch vertebra (TV). Independent risk factors for LOVO included AR curves (OR 3.4; P = 0.04) and first erect curve magnitudes > 30 degrees (OR 6.0; P = 0.002).

DISCUSSION

There is a 20.2% rate of less optimal VBT following VBT for Lenke 1A curves. AR curves are independently predictive of less optimal outcomes following VBT and require close attention to LIV selection. Surgeons should consider achieving an initial coronal correction < 30 degrees and extending the LIV to at least the TV to minimize the risk of LOVO.

A New Look at Vertebral Body Tethering (VBT): Through the Modified Clavien-Dindo-Sink (mCDS) Classification

INTRODUCTION

Anterior vertebral body tethering (AVBT) is increasingly popular as an option for surgical treatment of idiopathic scoliosis (IS). While the technology remains new, it is important for families and patients to be able to compare it to the current standard of care, posterior spinal fusion (PSF). The purpose of this study is to describe the complication rate of AVBT in IS using the mCDS and to compare it to the recently reported complication rate of PSF in IS.

METHODS

A multicenter pediatric spine deformity database was queried for all idiopathic scoliosis patients who underwent vertebral body tethering. There were 171 patients with a minimum 9-month follow-up included in this study. Complications were retrospectively graded by 2 attending pediatric spine surgeons using the mCDS classification system.

RESULTS

Data from 171 patients with idiopathic scoliosis was available for analysis, with 156/171 (91%) of patients being female and an average age of 12.2 years old at surgery. There were 156 thoracic tethers (1 with an LIV below L2), 5 lumbar tethers, 9 staged double tethers, and only 1 patient with same-day double tether. Fifty-five (55) (32%) patients experienced a total of 69 complications. The most common complication type for VBT by mCDS was Grade IIIb, encompassing 29/69 (42%) of complications. The second most frequent complication grade was Grade I at 23/69 (33%). Thirty-four (34) out of 69 (49%) of the VBT complications reported required either procedural/surgical intervention or admission to the ICU.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study to directly compare the complication profile of VBT to PSF using the mCDS. Forty-nine percent (49%) of the VBT complications reported were at least Grade III, while only 7% of complications in the control PSF cohort from the literature were Grade III or higher. The mCDS complication classification brings light to the early learning experience of a new technique compared to the widely accepted standard of PSF for IS.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III - Retrospective comparative study.

Evidence-based Indications for Vertebral Body Tethering in Spine Deformity

Posterior spinal fusion has long been established as an effective treatment for the surgical management of spine deformity. However, interest in nonfusion options continues to grow. Vertebral body tethering is a nonfusion alternative that allows for the preservation of growth and flexibility of the spine. The purpose of this investigation is to provide a practical and relevant review of the literature on the current evidence-based indications for vertebral body tethering. Early results and short-term outcomes show promise for the first generation of this technology. At this time, patients should expect less predictable deformity correction and higher revision rates. Long-term studies are necessary to establish the durability of early results. In addition, further studies should aim to refine preoperative evaluation and patient selection as well as defining the benefits of motion preservation and its long-term effects on spine health to ensure optimal patient outcomes.

Anterior Vertebral Body Tethering: A Review of the Available Evidence

Idiopathic scoliosis is a complex three-dimensional deformity of the spine with anterior overgrowth (hypokyphosis), coronal curvature, and axial rotation. Scoliosis treatment in the skeletally immature spine is therapeutically challenging because of growth and was commonly limited to observation, bracing treatment, or fusion. Fusion accomplishes powerful deformity correction at the expense of future growth and mobility of the involved segments, increasing the risk of adjacent segment degeneration and intervertebral disk disease later in life. Anterior vertebral body tethering is a motion-preserving technique that exploits the Hueter-Volkmann principle by applying compression at the anterior and convex aspects of the curve to stimulate differential vertebral growth for gradual deformity reduction without fusion. The appropriate timing, curve magnitude, tensioning, growth prediction, indications, and limitations of tethering are being refined as this technique becomes more prevalent. Early outcome studies show that growth modulation with vertebral body tethering is safe, can achieve good results, and preserve motion in select patients.

Vertebral body tethering for idiopathic scoliosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Vertebral body tethering (VBT) is a recent procedure to correct and reduce spinal curves in skeletally immature patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to determine the expected curve reduction and potential complications for adolescent patients after VBT.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar and Cochrane databases were searched until February 2022. Records were screened against pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data sources were prospective and retrospective studies. Demographics, mean differences in Cobb angle, surgical details and complication rates were recorded. Meta-analysis was conducted using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

This systematic review includes 19 studies, and the meta-analysis includes 16 of these. VBT displayed a statistically significant reduction in Cobb angle from pre-operative to final (minimum 2 years) measurements. The initial mean Cobb angle was 47.8° (CI 95% 42.9-52.7°) and decreased to 22.2° (CI 95% 19.9-24.5°). The mean difference is - 25.8° (CI 95% - 28.9-22.7) (p < 0.01). The overall complication rate was 23% (CI 95% 14.4-31.6%), the most common complication was tether breakage 21.9% (CI 95% 10.6-33.1%). The spinal fusion rate was 7.2% (CI 95% 2.3-12.1%).

CONCLUSION

VBT results in a significant reduction of AIS at 2 years of follow-up. Overall complication rate was relatively high although the consequences of the complications are unknown. Further research is required to explore the reasons behind the complication rate and determine the optimal timing for the procedure. VBT remains a promising new procedure that is effective at reducing scoliotic curves and preventing spinal fusion in the majority of patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Systematic review of Therapeutic Studies with evidence level II-IV.

Can anterior vertebral body tethering provide superior range of motion outcomes compared to posterior spinal fusion in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis? A systematic review

PURPOSE

Anterior vertebral body tethering (AVBT) was introduced as a fusionless alternative to treating adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) while preserving range of motion (ROM). This is the first systematic review to compare the ROM outcomes between AVBT and PSF in treating AIS.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive search on PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library. Inclusion criteria were patients with AIS treated with AVBT or PSF or both, and clearly defined ROM outcomes; exclusion criteria were scoliosis other than AIS, biomechanical or cadaveric studies, non-English publications, case reports, conference summaries, unpublished literature, commentaries, and reviews. Primary outcome was ROM. Secondary outcomes included Cobb angle correction, quality of life (QOL), complications, and muscle strength and endurance.

RESULTS

Twelve studies were included in this review. We found moderate evidence to support that AVBT results in superior ROM outcomes than PSF while achieving comparable Cobb angle correction with low evidence. The comparison of QOL outcomes between AVBT and PSF remained inconclusive. In addition to the complications noted conventionally in PSF, AVBT could result in over-correction and distal adding-on. We also found very low evidence to support that AIS patients treated with AVBT have superior muscle strength and endurance when compared to those treated with PSF.

CONCLUSIONS

AVBT provides better preservation of ROM and muscle strength postoperatively when compared with PSF, while achieving comparable curve correction. Future studies should explore the spinal growth trajectory to determine the window of opportunity for AVBT in AIS.

Analgesic options for anterior approach to scoliosis repair: a scoping review

PURPOSE

The ideal analgesic regimen for the anterior approach to scoliosis repair is not clearly defined. The purpose of the study was to summarize and identify gaps in the current literature specific to the anterior approach to scoliosis repair.

METHODS

A scoping review was conducted in July 2022 utilizing PubMed, Cochrane, and Scopus databases guided by the PRISMA-ScR framework.

RESULTS

The database search generated 641 possible articles, 13 of which met all inclusion criteria. All articles focused on the effectiveness and safety of regional anesthetic techniques, while a minority also provided both opioid and non-opioid medication frameworks.

CONCLUSION

Continuous Epidural Analgesia (CEA) is the most well-studied intervention for pain control in anterior scoliosis repair, but other, more novel regional anesthetic techniques offer safe and effective potential alternatives. More research is indicated to compare the effectiveness of different regional techniques and perioperative medication regimens specific to anterior scoliosis repair.

The different applications of Vertebral Body Tethering - Narrative review and clinical experience

Background

Vertebral body tethering (VBT) has been originally developed as a growth modulation technique for the surgical management of skeletally immature patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). Given the positive results obtained in this setting, the use of VBT is gradually expanding to other patient categories, such as those with no or limited remaining growth or with non-idiopathic scoliosis. Aim of this manuscript is to offer an overview over the current applications of VBT, along with imaging and comments derived from the clinical experience. The work was based on a literature search conducted in January 2023 on Pubmed, Scopus and Web of Science databases. Following keywords were used for the search: vertebral body tethering, adolescent idiopathic scoliosis, early onset scoliosis, neuromuscular scoliosis, syndromic scoliosis.

Results

Three patient categories in which VBT has been applied have been highlighted: VBT for growth modulation in AIS, VBT as anterior scoliosis correction in AIS and VBT for non-idiopathic curves or early-onset scoliosis.

Conclusion

While growth modulation in AIS still represents the most widespread use of VBT, the use of this technique has yielded positive results in different settings as well, such as scoliosis correction in AIS or temporary or definitive curve management in non-AIS curves. While long-term results are lacking, patient selection seems to play a central role to reduce the complication rate and ensure predictable and stable results.

Perioperative Outcomes of Open Anterior Vertebral Body Tethering and Instrumented Posterior Spinal Fusion for Skeletally Immature Patients With Idiopathic Scoliosis

BACKGROUND

Correcting adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) without fusion can be achieved with anterior vertebral body tethering (AVBT). However, little is known about the perioperative outcomes, pain control, and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing AVBT compared with instrumented posterior spinal fusion (IPSF).

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, we compared pediatric patients with AIS who underwent either AVBT or IPSF. Inclusion criteria were based on the AVBT group, which included primary thoracic idiopathic scoliosis, Risser ≤1, curve magnitude 40 to 70 degrees, age 9 to 15, no prior spine surgery, index surgery between 2014 and 2019, and minimum 2-year follow-up. Patient demographics, perioperative metrics, pain visual analog scale scores, opiate morphine equivalent usage, cost data, and radiographic outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

We identified 23 patients who underwent AVBT and 24 matched patients in the IPSF group based on inclusion criteria. Patients undergoing AVBT and PSF were similar in age (12±1 y vs. 13±1 y, P =0.132) and average follow-up time (3.8±1.6 y vs. 3.3±1.4 y, P =0.210). There were 23 female patients (87%) in the AVBT group and 24 female (92%) patients in the IPSF group. Intraoperatively, estimated blood loss (498±290 vs. 120±47 mL, P <0.001) and procedure duration (419±95 vs. 331±83 min, P =0.001) was significantly greater in the IPSF group compared with AVBT. Length of stay was lower in the AVBT group compared with PSF (4±1 vs. 5±2 d, P =0.04). PSF patients had significantly greater total postoperative opiate morphine equivalent use compared with AVBT (2.2±1.9 vs. 5.6±3.4 mg/kg, P <0.001). Overall direct costs following PSF and AVBT were similar ($47,655+$12,028 vs. $50,891±$24,531, P =0.58). Preoperative radiographic parameters were similar between both the groups, with a major thoracic curve at 51±10 degrees for AVBT and 54±9 degrees for IPSF ( P =0.214). At the most recent follow-up, IPSF patients had greater curve reduction to a mean major thoracic curve of 11±7 degrees (79%) compared with 19±10 degrees (63%) in AVBT patients ( P =0.002). Nine patients (39%) required revision surgery following AVBT compared with 4 patients(17%) following IPSF ( P =0.09).

CONCLUSIONS

In a select cohort of patients, AVBT offers decreased surgical time, blood loss, length of stay, and postoperative opiate usage compared with IPSF. Although IPSF resulted in greater deformity correction at 2-year follow-up, the majority of patients who underwent AVBT had ≤35 major curves and avoided fusion. There is optimism for AVBT as a treatment option for select AIS patients, but long-term complications are still being understood, and the risk for revision surgeries remains high.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Vertebral body tethering: An alternative to posterior spinal fusion in idiopathic scoliosis?

Introduction

Skeletally immature patient with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) whose curves continue to progress despite bracing should be treated surgically. Vertebral body tethering (VBT) is a non-fusion, compression-based, growth preserving alternative to posterior spinal fusion (PSF) based on the concept of 'growth modulation' to prevent possible functional complications secondary to fusion while correcting scoliotic deformity. This review aims to shed light on the indications of VBT, short- and medium-term outcomes, describe the surgical technique and associated complications, and to compare its efficacy to that of PSF.

Methods

A review of peer-reviewed literature on VBT as a surgical technique, its indications, outcomes, complications, and comparison with other surgical interventions to correct AIS was conducted in December 2022.

Results

Indications remain controversial and mainly include stage of skeletal maturity based on radiographic markers, curve location, magnitude and flexibility, and presence of secondary curve. Assessment of VBT clinical success should not be restricted to improvement in radiographic parameters but should include functional results and patient-centered outcomes, improved body image and pain, and durability of outcomes. In contrast to fusion, VBT seems to be associated with preserved spinal growth, shorter recovery, potentially better functional outcomes, less motion loss but possibly less curve correction.

Discussion

Yet still, with VBT there exists a risk of overcorrection, construct breakage or failure of procedure which require revision and at times conversion to PSF. Patient and family preferences must be accounted for acknowledging gaps in knowledge, attributes and drawbacks of each intervention.