Background and context In patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) of main thoracic and lumbar spine regions, combined anterior thoracic vertebral body tethering and posterior lumbar spine tethering (ATVBT/PLST) is a novel non-fusion treatment option for growth modulation and conservation of motion. Methods Fourteen patients with AIS who underwent ATVBT/PLST with at least 2-year follow-up were included. Primary outcomes included quality of life as assessed by SRS-22 instruments, radiographic analysis, and revision operations. We secondarily reported perioperative metrics and post-operative opiate morphine equivalents (OME). Clinical success was defined as patients who achieved skeletal maturity with ≤ 30° curve magnitude of both their main thoracic and thoracolumbar/lumbar curves and who did not undergo posterior spine instrumentation and fusion (PSIF). Results Patients had a mean age of 11.6 years (range 10–14 years), majority were girls (92%), and mean follow-up was 3.0 years (range 2–4.8 years). All patients were skeletally immature with a Risser ≤ 2. Included curves were Lenke 1C, 3C, or 6C. Mean preoperative curve magnitudes were 53° ± 8° (range 45°–65°) main thoracic and 49° ± 9° (range 40°–62°) thoracolumbar/lumbar curves. At most recent follow-up, patients had a mean main thoracic curve of 29° ± 8° (range 15°–40°) and a mean thoracolumbar/lumbar curve of 20° ± 15° (range 4°–35°). 50% required a revision operation. Cable breakage occurred in 43%, which did not always require revision. One patient progressed to thoracic fusion, but no patient underwent lumbar fusion. Patients had a mean SRS-22 outcome score of 4.2 ± 0.4. Conclusions ATVBT/PLST is a potential alternative to spine fusion for select immature patients with AIS at a minimum 2-year follow-up. ATVBT/PLST potentially offers motion conservation at the cost of a higher revision rate. Further study and reporting of results are necessary to refine indications and techniques, which in turn will improve outcomes of this procedure. Level of evidence Level IV—Case series without comparative group.
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.
Purpose: Both flexible intramedullary nails (FINs) and plate osteosynthesis are commonly used for the treatment of femoral shaft fractures in pediatric patients. The purpose of this study is to determine the refracture rate after hardware removal in pediatric femur fractures. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study that utilized the Pediatric Health Information System database to determine the number of pediatric patients ages 4 to 10 who underwent surgical fixation of a femur fracture and subsequent hardware removal between the years 2015 and 2019. All patients had a minimum of a 2-year follow-up to assess for refracture. Patients with metabolic bone disease, neuromuscular conditions, bone fragility disorders, nutritional deficiencies, and pathologic fractures were excluded. Results: Of the total, 2805 pediatric patients with 2881 femoral shaft fractures who underwent FIN (48.4%), plate fixation (36.1%), splinting/casting (14.9%), or external fixation (0.6%) were included. The mean age of patients with index fracture was 7.2 years (SD, 2.1) and 69% were males. Eight hundred eighty patients (60%) in the FIN group had their hardware removed compared with 693 patients (68%) in the plate fixation group (P = 0.07), at an average of 287 ± 191 days versus 320 ± 203 days (P = 0.03). Refracture occurred in 13 patients (1.5%) who had their hardware retained and in 21 patients (1.4%) who had their hardware removed (P = 0.732). Among 65% of patients who underwent hardware removal, refracture occurred in 7 patients with FIN (0.8%) and 14 patients with plate fixation (2.2%) (P = 0.04). Refracture occurred within 365 days from hardware removal in 1 patient with FIN (0.1%) and 7 patients with plate fixation (1%) (P = 0.01). In logistic regression, patients with FIN fixation had lower odds of refracture after hardware removal compared with plate fixation (adjusted odds ratio: 0.39; 95% CI: 0.15-0.97). Age and payor status did not reach statistical significance in multivariate analysis. Conclusions: The rate of refracture after hardware removal for pediatric patients with a femoral shaft fracture was similar between patients with hardware retained and removal. However, patients with FIN had a lower rate of refracture AFTER hardware removal compared with plate fixation. This information can be helpful for advising families regarding the risks of refracture after hardware removal. Level of Evidence Level IV—retrospective cohort study.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.