Correction of L5 Tilt in 2-Row Vertebral Body Tethering Versus Posterior Spinal Fusion for Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis

被引：0

作者：

De Varona-Cocero, Abel ^{[1
]}

Ani, Fares ^{[1
]}

Kim, Nathan ^{[1
]}

Robertson, Djani ^{[1
]}

Myers, Camryn ^{[1
]}

Ashayeri, Kimberly ^{[1
]}

Maglaras, Constance ^{[1
]}

Protopsaltis, Themistocles ^{[1
]}

Rodriguez-Olaverri, Juan C. ^{[1
]}

机构：

[1] NYU Langone Orthoped Hosp, Dept Orthopaed, New York, NY USA

来源：

CLINICAL SPINE SURGERY | 2025年 / 38卷 / 03期

关键词：

L5; tilt; tether; fusion; curve correction; scoliosis; fractional curve; GROWTH MODULATION; NATURAL-HISTORY; TRUNK RANGE; BACK-PAIN; ANTERIOR; MOTION; VALIDATION; SURGERY; RETURN; RISK;

D O I：

10.1097/BSD.0000000000001697

中图分类号：

R74 [神经病学与精神病学];

学科分类号：

摘要：

Study Design:Single-center retrospective cohort study.Objective:To compare the correction of fractional curve and L5 tilt in 2RVBT versus PSF with LIV in the lumbar spine.Summary of Background Data:Vertebral body tethering, an AIS fusion-alternative, avoids rigid constructs, allowing for lower instrumented vertebra (LIV) selection. Single-tether constructs break, but mini-open thoracoscopic assistant double-row vertebral body tethering (2RVBT) reduces this. Limited comparative studies exist with posterior spinal fusion (PSF).Methods:Retrospective analysis of AIS correction surgeries with lumbar LIV using preoperative and minimum 2-year postoperative imaging. Patients were divided into 2RVBT or PSF groups. Data included age, Riser, UIV, LIV, instrumented levels, and revision rates. Radiographic analyses included preoperative and postoperative main curve Cobb (MCC), secondary curve Cobb (SCC), fractional curve Cobb (FCC), and L5 tilt.Results:Ninety-nine patients participated (49 in 2RVBT, 50 in PSF). Preoperatively, secondary CC differed significantly (2RVBT: 44.6 +/- 10.4 degrees vs. PSF: 39.5 +/- 11.8 degrees, P=0.026), but not L5 tilt, MCC, or FCC. Postoperatively, MCC (2RVBT: 25.7 +/- 12.3 degrees vs. PSF: 19.5 +/- 7.4 degrees, P=0.003) and SCC (2RVBT: 18.0 +/- 8.4 degrees vs. PSF: 14.5 +/- 6.6 degrees, P=0.012) varied. Preoperative to postoperative changes in MCC (2RVBT: -32.0 +/- 11.3 degrees vs. PSF: -37.2 +/- 13.3 degrees, P=0.044) and L5 tilt (-13.8 +/- 9.0 degrees vs. PSF: -8.1 +/- 6.8 degrees, P=0.001) differed. Revision rates were similar (2RVBT: 2.0%, PSF: 4.0%, P=0.57). In 2RVBT, 3 tethers broke, 1 revision occurred for a broken tether, and 1 pleural effusion needed thoracocentesis. In PSF, 1 superficial infection needed surgery, and 1 revision was for add-on phenomenon. After PSM for Lenke classification, 54 patients remained (27 in each group). At 2 years, 2RVBT showed less MCC correction (-30.8 +/- 11.8 degrees vs. -38.9 +/- 11.9 degrees, P=0.017), but greater L5 tilt correction (-14.6 +/- 10.0 degrees vs. -7.5 +/- 6.0 degrees, P=0.003).Conclusions:This study with a minimum 2-year radiographic follow-up demonstrates that 2RVBT results in greater L5 tilt correction when compared with posterior spinal fusion after PSM for Lenke classification and similar rates of revision surgery.Level of Evidence:Level III.

引用

页码：E186 / E192

页数：7

共 49 条

[1]

Konieczny M.R., Senyurt H., Krauspe R., Epidemiology of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis, J Child Orthop, 7, pp. 3-9, (2013)

[2]

Dunn J., Henrikson N.B., Morrison C.C., Et al., Screening for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: evidence report and systematic review for the US Preventive Services Task Force, JAMA, 319, pp. 173-187, (2018)

[3]

Ascani E., Bartolozzi P., Logroscino C.A., Et al., Natural history of untreated idiopathic scoliosis after skeletal maturity, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 11, pp. 784-789, (1986)

[4]

Danielsson A.J., Natural history of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a tool for guidance in decision of surgery of curves above 50°, J Child Orthop, 7, pp. 37-41, (2013)

[5]

Rushton P.R.P., Grevitt M.P., Comparison of untreated adolescent idiopathic scoliosis with normal controls: a review and statistical analysis of the literature, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 38, pp. 778-785, (2013)

[6]

Simony A., Hansen E.J., Carreon L.Y., Et al., Health-related quality-of-life in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients 25 years after treatment, Scoliosis, 10, (2015)

[7]

Helenius L., Diarbakerli E., Grauers A., Et al., Back pain and quality of life after surgical treatment for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis at 5-year follow-up: comparison with healthy controls and patients with untreated idiopathic scoliosis, J Bone Joint Surg Am, 101, pp. 1460-1466, (2019)

[8]

Colak T.K., Akgul T., Colak I., Et al., Health related quality of life and perception of deformity in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis, J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil, 30, pp. 597-602, (2017)

[9]

Hilibrand A.S., Robbins M., Adjacent segment degeneration and adjacent segment disease: the consequences of spinal fusion?, Spine J, 4, pp. S190-S194, (2004)

[10]

Kepler C.K., Meredith D.S., Green D.W., Et al., Long-term outcomes after posterior spine fusion for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis, Curr Opin Pediatr, 24, pp. 68-75, (2012)

← 1 2 3 4 5 →