No abstract

No abstract

Study Design. A multicenter retrospective study. Objective. The aim of this study was to compare pelvic obliquity correction and reoperation rate in neuromuscular scoliosis patients who had their pelvis included in a posterior spinal fusion (pelvic fusion, PF) at their index procedure versus revision procedures. Summary of Background Data. There is limited information on outcomes specific to fusing to the pelvis for neuromuscular scoliosis in a revision operation versus index surgery. Methods. Charts and radiographs were reviewed of patients with PF for neuromuscular scoliosis from January 2003 to August 2015 at four high-volume pediatric spine centers with >2 year follow-up. Results. Two hundred eighty-five patients met inclusion criteria; 271 had PF done at index surgery and 14 had PF done during revision surgery. Before index procedure, there were no significant differences in Cobb angle (P = 0.13). Before PF, there was no difference in pelvic obliquity (P = 0.26). At the time of fusion to the pelvis, estimated blood loss (P = 0.23) and operative time (P = 0.43) did not differ between index and revision groups. Percent correction in pelvic obliquity was similar for both groups (P = 0.72). Overall, 69 patients had complications requiring return to the operating room. Excluding the revision surgery for inclusion of the pelvis for the revision group, there was still a lower reoperation rate with index PF (22.9%, n = 62/271) than revision PF (50.0%, n = 7/14) (P = 0.02). Implant failures were significantly higher in the revision group (index = 7.4%, 20/271; revision = 42.9%, 6/14; P < 0.001). Conclusion. PF at the index spinal fusion led to similar correction of pelvic obliquity with approximately half the reoperation rate compared with PF at a revision surgery. Operative time and blood loss were similar between index and revision spinal fusion. Level of Evidence: 4

The complex nature of the surgical treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) requires a wide variety of health care providers. A well-coordinated, multidisciplinary team approach to the care of these patients is essential for providing high-quality care. This review offers an up-to-date overview of the numerous interventions and safety measures for improving outcomes after AIS surgery throughout the perioperative phases of care. Reducing the risk of potentially devastating and costly complications after AIS surgery is the responsibility of every single member of the health care team. Specifically, this review will focus on the perioperative measures for preventing surgical site infections, reducing the risk of neurologic injury, minimizing surgical blood loss, and preventing postoperative complications. Also, the review will highlight the postoperative protocols that emphasize early mobilization and accelerated discharge.

Introduction: Lateral humeral condyle fractures account for 12% to 20% of all distal humerus fractures in the pediatric population. When surgery is indicated, fixation may be achieved with either Kirschner-wires or screws. The literature comparing the outcomes of these 2 different fixation methods is currently limited. The purpose of this study is to compare both the complication and union rates of these 2 forms of operative treatment in a multicenter cohort of children with lateral humeral condyle fractures. Methods: This retrospective study was performed across 6 different institutions. Data were retrospectively collected preoperatively and 6 weeks, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. Patients were divided into 2 cohorts based on the type of initial treatment: K-wire fixation and screw fixation. Statistical comparisons between these 2 cohorts were performed with an alpha of 0.05. Results: There were 762 patients included in this study, 72.6% (n=553) of which were treated with K-wire fixation. The mean duration of immobilization was 5 weeks in both cohorts, and most patients in this study demonstrated radiographic healing by 11 weeks postoperatively, regardless of treatment method. Similar reoperation rates were seen among those treated with K-wires and screws (5.6% vs. 4.3%, P=0.473). Elbow stiffness requiring further intervention with physical therapy was significantly more common in those treated with K-wires compared with children treated with screws (21.2% vs. 13.9%, P=0.023) as was superficial skin infection (3.8% vs. 0%, P=0.002), but there was no significant difference in nonunion rates between the two groups (2.4% vs. 1.3%, P=1.000). Conclusion: We found similar success rates between K-wire and screw fixation in this patient population. Contrary to previous studies, we did not find evidence that treatment with screw fixation decreases the likelihood of experiencing nonunion. However, given the unique complications associated with K-wire fixation, such as elbow stiffness and superficial skin infection, the treatment with screw fixation remains a reasonable alternative to K-wire fixation in these patients. Level of Evidence: Level III—retrospective comparative study