Anterior and Posterior Fusion for Large, Rigid Idiopathic Scoliosis: Does Implant Density Matter?

Connor Delman, J. Matthew Cage, Greg Lausé, Rolando Roberto, Eric Klineberg

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: Despite advancements in surgical techniques, controversy remains regarding the optimal implant density for the correction of idiopathic scoliosis. Recent evidence has suggested that equivalent radiographic and clinical outcomes can be achieved with lower implant densities for those with moderate curves and good flexibility. Among the experts, the consensus has continued that higher implant densities should be used for larger, stiffer curves. The purpose of the present study was to compare the radiographic results between high-implant density (HID) and low-implant density (LID) constructs in patients with large (>65°), rigid (<50% flexibility) curves who had undergone anterior release and posterior spinal fusion. Methods: We reviewed the idiopathic scoliosis cases performed at a single institution from 2006 to 2014. Only those meeting the inclusion criteria were selected. The patients were divided into HID and LID groups. The postoperative radiographs were compared for coronal correction, thoracic kyphosis, pelvic tilt, lumbar lordosis, and sagittal vertical axis. Results: A statistically significant improvement in coronal correction was detected in the HID group at all follow-up points (final follow-up: HID, 81.1% vs. LID, 70.4%; P = 0.01). When preoperative thoracic kyphosis was considered, no differences were found between the 2 groups. No differences were found in the other sagittal parameters. Conclusion: In patients with large, rigid idiopathic scoliosis undergoing anterior release and posterior spinal fusion, a small, but statistically, significant improvement in the coronal Cobb angle was seen. It remains to be determined whether this small difference in radiographic correction will have any influence on the clinical outcome.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalWorld Neurosurgery
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2019

Fingerprint

Scoliosis
Spinal Fusion
Kyphosis
Thorax
Lordosis

Keywords

  • Anchor density
  • Anterior release
  • Curves
  • Idiopathic scoliosis
  • Implant density
  • Rigid

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Clinical Neurology

Cite this

Anterior and Posterior Fusion for Large, Rigid Idiopathic Scoliosis : Does Implant Density Matter? / Delman, Connor; Cage, J. Matthew; Lausé, Greg; Roberto, Rolando; Klineberg, Eric.

In: World Neurosurgery, 01.01.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{27f7a0b7247f4d1d85c55cee9585b777,
title = "Anterior and Posterior Fusion for Large, Rigid Idiopathic Scoliosis: Does Implant Density Matter?",
abstract = "Background: Despite advancements in surgical techniques, controversy remains regarding the optimal implant density for the correction of idiopathic scoliosis. Recent evidence has suggested that equivalent radiographic and clinical outcomes can be achieved with lower implant densities for those with moderate curves and good flexibility. Among the experts, the consensus has continued that higher implant densities should be used for larger, stiffer curves. The purpose of the present study was to compare the radiographic results between high-implant density (HID) and low-implant density (LID) constructs in patients with large (>65°), rigid (<50{\%} flexibility) curves who had undergone anterior release and posterior spinal fusion. Methods: We reviewed the idiopathic scoliosis cases performed at a single institution from 2006 to 2014. Only those meeting the inclusion criteria were selected. The patients were divided into HID and LID groups. The postoperative radiographs were compared for coronal correction, thoracic kyphosis, pelvic tilt, lumbar lordosis, and sagittal vertical axis. Results: A statistically significant improvement in coronal correction was detected in the HID group at all follow-up points (final follow-up: HID, 81.1{\%} vs. LID, 70.4{\%}; P = 0.01). When preoperative thoracic kyphosis was considered, no differences were found between the 2 groups. No differences were found in the other sagittal parameters. Conclusion: In patients with large, rigid idiopathic scoliosis undergoing anterior release and posterior spinal fusion, a small, but statistically, significant improvement in the coronal Cobb angle was seen. It remains to be determined whether this small difference in radiographic correction will have any influence on the clinical outcome.",
keywords = "Anchor density, Anterior release, Curves, Idiopathic scoliosis, Implant density, Rigid",
author = "Connor Delman and Cage, {J. Matthew} and Greg Laus{\'e} and Rolando Roberto and Eric Klineberg",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.wneu.2019.08.123",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "World Neurosurgery",
issn = "1878-8750",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Anterior and Posterior Fusion for Large, Rigid Idiopathic Scoliosis

T2 - Does Implant Density Matter?

AU - Delman, Connor

AU - Cage, J. Matthew

AU - Lausé, Greg

AU - Roberto, Rolando

AU - Klineberg, Eric

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - Background: Despite advancements in surgical techniques, controversy remains regarding the optimal implant density for the correction of idiopathic scoliosis. Recent evidence has suggested that equivalent radiographic and clinical outcomes can be achieved with lower implant densities for those with moderate curves and good flexibility. Among the experts, the consensus has continued that higher implant densities should be used for larger, stiffer curves. The purpose of the present study was to compare the radiographic results between high-implant density (HID) and low-implant density (LID) constructs in patients with large (>65°), rigid (<50% flexibility) curves who had undergone anterior release and posterior spinal fusion. Methods: We reviewed the idiopathic scoliosis cases performed at a single institution from 2006 to 2014. Only those meeting the inclusion criteria were selected. The patients were divided into HID and LID groups. The postoperative radiographs were compared for coronal correction, thoracic kyphosis, pelvic tilt, lumbar lordosis, and sagittal vertical axis. Results: A statistically significant improvement in coronal correction was detected in the HID group at all follow-up points (final follow-up: HID, 81.1% vs. LID, 70.4%; P = 0.01). When preoperative thoracic kyphosis was considered, no differences were found between the 2 groups. No differences were found in the other sagittal parameters. Conclusion: In patients with large, rigid idiopathic scoliosis undergoing anterior release and posterior spinal fusion, a small, but statistically, significant improvement in the coronal Cobb angle was seen. It remains to be determined whether this small difference in radiographic correction will have any influence on the clinical outcome.

AB - Background: Despite advancements in surgical techniques, controversy remains regarding the optimal implant density for the correction of idiopathic scoliosis. Recent evidence has suggested that equivalent radiographic and clinical outcomes can be achieved with lower implant densities for those with moderate curves and good flexibility. Among the experts, the consensus has continued that higher implant densities should be used for larger, stiffer curves. The purpose of the present study was to compare the radiographic results between high-implant density (HID) and low-implant density (LID) constructs in patients with large (>65°), rigid (<50% flexibility) curves who had undergone anterior release and posterior spinal fusion. Methods: We reviewed the idiopathic scoliosis cases performed at a single institution from 2006 to 2014. Only those meeting the inclusion criteria were selected. The patients were divided into HID and LID groups. The postoperative radiographs were compared for coronal correction, thoracic kyphosis, pelvic tilt, lumbar lordosis, and sagittal vertical axis. Results: A statistically significant improvement in coronal correction was detected in the HID group at all follow-up points (final follow-up: HID, 81.1% vs. LID, 70.4%; P = 0.01). When preoperative thoracic kyphosis was considered, no differences were found between the 2 groups. No differences were found in the other sagittal parameters. Conclusion: In patients with large, rigid idiopathic scoliosis undergoing anterior release and posterior spinal fusion, a small, but statistically, significant improvement in the coronal Cobb angle was seen. It remains to be determined whether this small difference in radiographic correction will have any influence on the clinical outcome.

KW - Anchor density

KW - Anterior release

KW - Curves

KW - Idiopathic scoliosis

KW - Implant density

KW - Rigid

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85075430674&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85075430674&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.wneu.2019.08.123

DO - 10.1016/j.wneu.2019.08.123

M3 - Article

C2 - 31470168

AN - SCOPUS:85075430674

JO - World Neurosurgery

JF - World Neurosurgery

SN - 1878-8750

ER -