This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

Introduction Idiopathic scoliosis, defined as a > 10° curvature of the spine in the frontal plane, is one of the most common spinal deformities. Age, initial curve magnitude and other parameters define whether a scoliotic deformity will progress or not. Still, their interactions and amounts of individual contribution are not fully elaborated and were the aim of this systematic review. Methods A systematic literature search was conducted in the common databases using MESH terms, searching for predictive factors of curve progression in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (“adolescent idiopathic scoliosis” OR “ais” OR “idiopathic scoliosis”) AND (“predictive factors” OR “progression” OR “curve progression” OR “prediction” OR “prognosis”). The identified and analysed factors of each study were rated to design a top five scale of the most relevant factors. Results Twenty-eight investigations with 8255 patients were identified by literature search. Patient-specific risk factors for curve progression from initial curve were age (at diagnosis < 13 years), family history, bone mineral status (< 110 mg/cm3 in quantitative CT) and height velocity (7–8 cm/year, peak 11.6 ± 1.4 years). Relevant radiological criteria indicating curve progression included skeletal maturity, marked by Risser stages (Risser < 1) or Sanders Maturity Scale (SMS < 5), the initial extent of the Cobb angle (> 25° progression) and curve location (thoracic single or double curve). Discussion This systematic review summarised the current state of knowledge as the basis for creation of patient-specific algorithms regarding a risk calculation for a progressive scoliotic deformity. Curve magnitude is the most relevant predictive factor, followed by status of skeletal maturity and curve location.

We aimed to systematically review the literature to analyze the differences in posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF), anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF), and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), focusing on the complications, risk factors, and fusion rate of each approach. Spinal fusion surgery is a well-established surgical procedure for a variety of indications, and different approaches developed. The various approaches and their advantages, as well as approach-related pathology and complications, are well investigated in spinal surgery. Focusing only on lumbosacral fusion, the comparative studies of different approaches remain fewer in numbers. We systematically reviewed the literature on the complications associated with lumbosacral interbody fusion. Only the PLIF, ALIF, or TLIF approaches and studies published within the last decade (2007–2017) were included. The exclusion criteria in this study were oblique lumbar interbody fusion, extreme lateral interbody fusion, more than one procedure per patient, and reported patient numbers less than 10. The outcome variables were indications, fusion rates, operation time, perioperative complications, and clinical outcome by means of Visual Analog Scale, Oswestry Disability Index, and Japanese Orthopaedic Association score. Five prospective, 17 retrospective, and two comparative studies that investigated the lumbosacral region were included. Mean fusion rates were 91,4%. ALIF showed a higher operation time, while PLIF resulted in greater blood loss. In all approaches, significant improvements in the clinical outcome were achieved, with ALIF showing slightly better results. Regarding complications, the ALIF technique showed the highest complication rates. Lumbosacral fusion surgery is a treatment to provide good results either through an approach for various indications as causes of lower back pain. For each surgical approach, advantages can be depicted. However, perioperative complications and risk factors are numerous and vary with ALIF, PLIF, and TLIF procedures, as well as with fusion rates.

Background Spinal fusion is a well-established procedure in the treatment of degenerative spinal diseases. Previous research shows that the use of this operative treatment has been growing in recent decades in industrialized countries and has become one of the most cost-intensive surgical procedures. It seems that in some countries such as Germany—with its large, industrialized, European population—this increase is mainly driven by demographic changes with low fertility rates, increasing life expectancy, and an aging population. Based on current projections, however, Germany faces a population trend that many other countries are likely to follow within a few decades. An increasingly shrinking and aging working population may eventually put the healthcare system under enormous pressure, with greater demands for spinal fusions and associated higher costs. Thus, we aimed to provide reliable projections regarding the future demand for posterior spinal fusion procedures including age- and gender-related trends up to 2060, which will be necessary for future resource planning and possible improvements in actual treatment strategies. Questions/purposes (1) How is the use of posterior spinal fusions in Germany expected to change from 2019 through 2060, if currents trends continue? (2) How is the use of posterior spinal fusions in Germany expected to change depending on patients’ age and gender during this time period? Methods Comprehensive nationwide data provided by the Federal Statistical Office, the official institution for documenting all data on operations and procedures performed in Germany, were used to quantify posterior spinal fusion rates as a function of calendar year, age, and gender. Because there is a lack of evidence regarding future trends in the use of posterior spinal fusions, an autoregressive integrated moving average model on historical procedure rates from 2005 to 2019 in relation to official population projections from 2020 to 2060 was chosen to forecast future absolute numbers and incidence rates of this procedure in Germany. Long-term forecasting is more prone to unexpected disruptions than forecasting over short-term periods; however, longer spans facilitate estimates of how trends may challenge future healthcare systems if those trends continue, and thus are useful for research and planning. Results The incidence rate of posterior spinal fusion was projected to increase by approximately 83% (95% CI 28% to 139%) to 102% per 100,000 inhabitants (95% CI 71% to 133%) in 2060, with a 1.3-fold higher rate of women undergoing surgery in terms of absolute numbers. The highest increase identified by the model occurred in patients 75 years and older with 38,974 (95% CI 27,294 to 50,653) posterior spinal fusions in 2060, compared with 14,657 in 2019. This trend applied for both women and men, with a 246% (95% CI 138% to 355%) increase in the total number of posterior spinal fusions for women 75 years and older and a 296% (95% CI 222% to 370%) increase for men 75 years and older. At the same time, posterior spinal fusions in all age groups younger than 55 years were projected to follow a constant or even negative trend up to 2060. Conclusion Our findings suggest that increasing use of posterior spinal fusion, particularly in patients 75 years and older, will challenge healthcare systems worldwide if current trends persist. This study may serve as a model for many other industrialized countries facing similar demographic and procedure-specific developments in the future. This emphasizes the need to focus on frailty research as well as appropriate financial and human resource management. Effective perioperative medical management, multidisciplinary treatment, and interinstitutional protocols are warranted, especially in older patients as we attempt to manage these trends in the future. Level of Evidence Level III, economic and decision analysis.