Resolution of the lumbosacral fractional curve and evaluation of the risk for adding on in 101 patients with posterior correction of Lenke 3, 4, and 6 curves

被引:6
作者
Koller, Heiko [1 ]
Enercan, Meric [2 ]
Decker, Sebastian [3 ]
Mehdian, Hossein
Nasto, Luigi Aurelio [4 ]
Hitzl, Wolfgang [5 ,6 ,7 ]
Koller, Juliane [8 ]
Hempfing, Axel [9 ]
Hamzaoglu, Azmi [2 ]
机构
[1] Tech Univ Munich, Dept Neurosurg, Munich, Germany
[2] Istanbul Florence Nightingale Hosp, Istanbul Spine Ctr, Istanbul, Turkey
[3] Hannover Med Sch, Dept Traumatol, Hannover, Germany
[4] IRCCS Ist, Genoa, Italy
[5] Paracelsus Med Univ, Biostat, Salzburg, Austria
[6] Paracelsus Med Univ, Dept Ophthalmol & Optometry, Salzburg, Austria
[7] Paracelsus Med Univ, Expt Ophthalmol & Glaucoma Res Program, Salzburg, Austria
[8] Schoen Clin Vogtareuth, Dept Orthoped Surg, Vogtareuth, Germany
[9] Werner Wicker Clin, Spine Ctr, Bad Wildungen, Germany
关键词
scoliosis; idiopathic; surgery; correction; Lenke; 3; 4; 6; adding on; double major curve; deformity; lumbar; sacral; ADOLESCENT IDIOPATHIC SCOLIOSIS; FUSION;
D O I
10.3171/2020.11.SPINE201313
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
OBJECTIVE In double and triple major adolescent idiopathic scoliosis curves it is still controversial whether the lowest instrumented vertebra (LIV) should be L3 or L4. Too short a fusion can impede postoperative distal curve compensation and promote adding on (AON). Longer fusions lower the chance of compensation by alignment changes of the lumbosacral curve (LSC). This study sought to improve prediction accuracy for AON and surgical outcomes in Lenke type 3, 4, and 6 curves. METHODS This was a retrospective multicenter analysis of patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis who had Lenke 3, 4, and 6 curves and >= 1 year of follow-up after posterior correction. Resolution of the LSC was studied by changes of LIV tilt, L3 tilt, and L4 tilt, with the variables resembling surrogate measures for the LSC. AON was defined as a disc angle below LIV > 5 degrees at follow-up. A matched-pairs analysis was done of differences between LIV at L3 and at L4. A multivariate prediction analysis evaluated the AON risk in patients with LIV at L3. Clinical outcomes were assessed by the Scoliosis Research Society 22-item questionnaire (SRS-22). RESULTS The sample comprised 101 patients (average age 16 years). The LIV was L3 in 54%, and it was L4 in 39%. At follow-up, 87% of patients showed shoulder balance, 86% had trunk balance, and 64% had a lumbar curve (LC) 5 20 degrees. With an LC 5 20 degrees (p = 0.01), SRS-22 scores were better and AON was less common (26% vs 59%, p = 0.001). Distal extension of the fusion (e.g., LIV at L4) did not have a significant influence on achieving an LSC < 20 degrees; however, higher screw density allowed better LC correction and resulted in better spontaneous LSC correction. AON occurred in 34% of patients, or 40% if the LIV was L3. Patients with AON had a larger residual LSC, worse LC correction, and worse thoracic curve (TC) correction. A total of 44 patients could be included in the matched-pairs analysis. LC correction and TC correction were comparable, but AON was 50% for LIV at L3 and 18% for LIV at L4. Patients without AON had a significantly better LC correction and TC correction (p < 0.01). For patients with LIV at L3, a significant prediction model for AON was established including variables addressed by surgeons: postoperative LC and TC (negative predictive value 78%, positive predictive value 79%, sensitivity 79%, specificity 81%). CONCLUSIONS An analysis of 101 patients with Lenke 3, 4, and 6 curves showed that TC and LC correction had significant influence on LSC resolution and the risk for AON. Improving LC correction and achieving an LC < 20 degrees offers the potential to lower the risk for AON, particularly in patients with LIV at L3.
引用
收藏
页码:471 / 485
页数:15
相关论文
共 34 条
  • [1] Ando Kei, 2016, Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol, V26, P59
  • [2] Chan CYW, 2017, 24 IMAST INT M ADV S
  • [3] Importance of Distal Fusion Level in Major Thoracolumbar and Lumbar Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Treated by Rod Derotation and Direct Vertebral Rotation Following Pedicle Screw Instrumentation
    Chang, Dong-Gune
    Yang, Jae Hyuk
    Suk, Se-Il
    Suh, Seung-Woo
    Kim, Young-Hoon
    Cho, Woojin
    Jeong, Yeon-Seok
    Kim, Jin-Hyok
    Ha, Kee-Yong
    Lee, Jung-Hee
    [J]. SPINE, 2017, 42 (15) : E890 - E898
  • [4] The prevalence of disc aging and back pain after fusion extending into the lower lumbar spine - A matched MR study twenty-five years after surgery for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis
    Danielsson, AJ
    Cederlund, CG
    Ekholm, S
    Nachemson, AL
    [J]. ACTA RADIOLOGICA, 2001, 42 (02) : 187 - 197
  • [5] Does It Make a Difference to Stop Fusion at L3 Versus L4 in Terms of Disc and Facet Joint Degeneration: An MRI Study with Minimum 5 Years Follow-up
    Enercan M.
    Kahraman S.
    Yilar S.
    Cobanoglu M.
    Gokcen B.H.
    Karadereler S.
    Mutlu A.
    Ulusoy L.O.
    Ozturk C.
    Erturer E.
    Gebes E.
    Sanli T.
    Alanay A.
    Hamzaoglu A.
    [J]. Spine Deformity, 2016, 4 (3) : 237 - 244
  • [6] Criteria for Ending the Distal Fusion at the L3 Vertebra vs. L4 in Surgical Treatment of Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Patients with Lenke Type 3C, 5C, and 6C Curves: Results After Ten Years of Follow-up
    Erdem, Mehmet N.
    Karaca, Sinan
    Korkmaz, Mehmet F.
    Enercan, Meric
    Tezer, Mehmet
    Kara, Ayhan N.
    Hamzaoglu, Azmi
    [J]. CUREUS, 2018, 10 (05):
  • [7] The impact of perioperative complications on clinical outcome in adult deformity surgery
    Glassman, Steven D.
    Hamill, Christopher L.
    Bridwell, Keith H.
    Schwab, Frank J.
    Dimar, John R.
    Lowe, Thomas G.
    [J]. SPINE, 2007, 32 (24) : 2764 - 2770
  • [8] Hughes J, 2018, 53 ANN M SCOL RES SO
  • [9] Hyun SJ, 2015, 22 IMAST KUAL LUMP M
  • [10] Adjacent Segment Disease After Instrumented Fusion for Idiopathic Scoliosis Review of Current Trends and Controversies
    Ilharreborde, Brice
    Morel, Etienne
    Mazda, Keyvan
    Dekutoski, Mark B.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF SPINAL DISORDERS & TECHNIQUES, 2009, 22 (07): : 530 - 539