An Operation for Progressive Spinal Deformities

Hibbs, Russell A.

doi:10.1097/00003086-196400350-00002

Cited by 68 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The most common etiologies of spinal deformity in the early 20th century were tuberculous and paralytic (typically secondary to polio) [33]. In 1911, Russell Hibbs performed one of the first posterior spinal fusions for a gibbous deformity resulting from tuberculous infection of the spine at the New York Orthopaedic Dispensary and Hospital (now, a part of the New YorkPresbyterian Hospital of the Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons) [20]. By 1914, Hibbs was using this technique to treat patients with scoliosis.…”

Section: Premodern Eramentioning

confidence: 99%

A History of Bracing for Idiopathic Scoliosis in North America

Fayssoux

Cho

Herman

2010

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The care of the patient with scoliosis has a history extending back over two millennia with cast and brace treatment being a relatively recent endeavor, the modern era comprising just over half a century. Much of the previous literature provides a modest overview with emphasis on the history of the operative management. To better understand the current concepts of brace treatment of scoliosis, an appreciation of the history of bracing would be helpful. As such, we review the history of the treatment of scoliosis with an emphasis on modern brace treatment, primarily from a North American perspective. Our review utilizes consideration of historical texts as well as current treatises on the history of scoliosis and includes discussion of brace development with their proponents' rationale for why they work along with an appraisal of their clinical outcomes. We provide an overview of the current standards of care and the braces typically employed toward that standard including: the Milwaukee brace, the Wilmington brace, the Boston brace, the Charleston brace, the Providence brace and the SpineCor brace. Finally, we discuss future trends including improvements in methods of determining the critical period of peak growth velocity in children with scoliosis, the exciting promise of gene markers for progressive scoliosis and ''internal bracing'' options.

show abstract

Section: Premodern Eramentioning

confidence: 99%

A History of Bracing for Idiopathic Scoliosis in North America

Fayssoux

Cho

Herman

2010

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Successful spinal fusion procedures appeared in the medical literature in the early 20th century [1,2] . The development of an integrated osseous fusion complex is essential for the long-term success of these procedures [3] .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spinal fusion-hardware construct: Basic concepts and imaging review

Nouh¹

2012

WJR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The interpretation of spinal images fixed with metallic hardware forms an increasing bulk of daily practice in a bus�� imaging department. Radio�ogists are required to be familiar with the instrumentation and operative options used in spinal fixation and fusion procedures, especia�� in his or her institute. This is critica� in eva�uat-ing the position of imp�ants and potentia� comp�ications associated with the operative approaches and spinal fixation devices used. Thus, the radiologist can play an important role in patient care and outcome. This review out�ines the advantages and disadvantages of common�� used imaging methods and reports on the best yield for each modality and how to overcome the problematic issues associated with the presence of metallic hardware during imaging. Baseline radiographs are essentia� as the�� are the base�ine point for eva�uation of future studies shou�d patients deve�op s��mptoms suggesting possib�e comp�ications. The�� ma�� justif�� further imaging workup with computed tomography, magnetic resonance and/or nuc�ear medicine studies as the eva�u-ation of a patient with a spinal implant involves a multimodality approach. This review describes imaging features of potential complications associated with spinal fusion surgery as well as the instrumentation used. This basic knowledge aims to help radiologists approach ever��da�� practice in c�inica� imaging.

show abstract

“…The concept of decortication of the recipient graft bed in vertebral arthrodesis was first introduced by Hibbs in 1911 [9]. Decortication is the removal of the superficial part of the cortical bone that covers the posterior elements of the vertebra (spinous process, lamina and articular facet) and exposes vertebral cancellous bone, performed in order to accelerate bone graft integration with its recipient bed [4,5].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of decortication of the recipient graft bed on graft integration and tissue neoformation in the graft-recipient bed interface

Canto¹,

Garcia

Issa³

et al. 2008

Eur Spine J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of the present study was to assess the influence of decortication of the posterior elements of the vertebra (recipient bed) and the nature of the bone graft (cortical or cancellous bone) on graft integration and bone, cartilage and fiber neoformation in the interface between the vertebral recipient bed and the bone graft. Seventy-two male Wistar rats were divided into four experimental groups according to the presence or absence of decortication of the posterior vertebral elements and the use of a cortical or cancellous bone graft. Group I-the posterior elements were decorticated and cancellous bone used. Group II-the posterior elements were decorticated and cortical graft was used. Group III-the posterior elements were not decorticated and cancellous graft was used. Group IV-the posterior elements were not decorticated and cortical graft was used. The animals were killed 3, 6 and 9 weeks after surgery and the interface between the posterior elements and the bone graft was subjected to histomorphometric evaluation. Mean percent neoformed bone was 40.8% in group I (decortication and cancellous graft), 39.13% in group II (decortication and cortical graft), 6.13% in group III (non-decorticated and cancellous graft), and 9.27% in group IV (non-decorticated and cortical graft) for animals killed at 3 weeks (P = 0.0005). For animals killed at 6 weeks, the mean percent was 38.53% for group I, 40.40% for group II, 10.27% for group III, and 7.6% for group IV (P = 0.0005), and for animals killed at 9 weeks, the mean was 25.93% for group I, 30.6% for group II, 16.4% for group III, and 18.73% for group IV (P = 0.0026). The mean percent neoformed cartilage tissue was 8.36% for group I, 7.46% for group II, 11.1% for group III, and 9.13% for group IV for the animals killed at 3 weeks (P = 0.6544); 6.6% for group I, 8.07% for group, 7.47% for group III and 6.13% for group IV (P = 0.4889) for animals killed at 6 weeks, and 3.13% for group I, 4.06% for group II, 10.53% for group III and 12.07% for group IV (P = 0.0006) for animals killed at 9 weeks. Mean percent neoformed fibrous tissue was 11% for group I, 6.13% for group II, 26.27% for group III and 21.87% for group IV for animals killed at 3 weeks (P = 0.0008); 7.67% for group I, 7.1% for group II, 9.8% for group III and 10.4% for group IV (P = 0.7880) for animals killed at 6 weeks, and 3.73% for group I, 4.4% for group II, 6.67% for group III and 6.8% for group IV (P = 0.0214) for animals killed at 9 weeks. The statistically significant differences in percent tissue formation were related to decortication of the posterior elements. The use of a cortical or cancellous graft did not influence tissue neoformation. Ossification in the interface of the recipient graft bed was of the intramembranous type in the decorticated animals and endochondral type in the nondecorticated animals.

show abstract

An Operation for Progressive Spinal Deformities

Cited by 68 publications

References 0 publications

A History of Bracing for Idiopathic Scoliosis in North America

A History of Bracing for Idiopathic Scoliosis in North America

Spinal fusion-hardware construct: Basic concepts and imaging review

Influence of decortication of the recipient graft bed on graft integration and tissue neoformation in the graft-recipient bed interface

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About