Treatment of idiopathic scoliosis with CD-instrumentation: lumbar pedicle screws versus laminar hooks in 66 patients

We studied whether the pedicle screw is better than laminar hooks for fixation of the lumbar spine in the treatment of idiopathic scoliosis. 66 consecutive patients with idiopathic scoliosis (King I and II) were studied retrospectively. Group S included 33 patients (25 females) treated with pedicle screws. Their mean age at operation was 17 (13-54) years. Group H included 33 patients (30 females) treated exclusively with hooks. Their mean age at operation was 16 (1140) years. The preoperative mean angles of the thoracic curve in group S was 66 (42.115) degrees, and in group H 65 (42-121) degrees. The lumbar curve averaged 46 (20-85) degrees in group H and 53 (33-86) degrees in group S. All patients were fused only posteriorly with Cotrel-Dubousset instrumentation and an autogenic bone graft. The mean follow-up time was 4 (2-7) years. Mean correction of the thoracic curve was 45% in group S and 50% in group H. The lumbar curve was corrected by 50% in group S and 51% in group H. Loss of correction of the thoracic curve occurred in 5% in group S and 6% in group H and of the lumbar curve in 3% in group S and 10% in group H (p = 0.04). Group S better maintained the correction of the lateral tilt of the uninstrumented segment adjacent to the fusion (p = 0.04). Derotation, according to Perdriolle, in the distal segment adjacent to the fusion was 6% in group S and 2% in group H. We found no difference between correction of the thoracic and lumbar curves using pedicle screws and laminar hooks in the lumbar spine. Pedicle screws better maintained the correction of the lumbar curve and the lateral tilt in the distal segment adjacent to fusion.     

Treatment of idiopathic scoliosis with CD-instrumentation: Lumbar pedicle screws versus laminar hooks in 66 patients

We studied whether the pedicle screw is better than laminar hooks for fixation of the lumbar spine in the treatment of idiopathic scoliosis.

66 consecutive patients with idiopathic scoliosis (King I and II) were studied retrospectively. Group S included 33 patients (25 females) treated with pedicle screws. Their mean age at operation was 17 (13-54) years. Group H included 33 patients (30 females) treated exclusively with hooks. Their mean age at operation was 16 (11-40) years. The preoperative mean angles of the thoracic curve in group S was 66 (42-115)°, and in group H 65 (42-121)°. The lumbar curve averaged 46 (20-85)° in group H and 53 (33-86)° in group S. All patients were fused only posteriorly with Cotrel-Dubousset instrumentation and an autogenic bone graft. The mean follow-up time was 4 (2-7) years.

Mean correction of the thoracic curve was 45% in group S and 50% in group H. The lumbar curve was corrected by 50% in group S and 51% in group H. Loss of correction of the thoracic curve occurred in 5% in group S and 6% in group H and of the lumbar curve in 3% in group S and 10% in group H (p = 0.04). Group S better maintained the correction of the lateral tilt of the uninstrumented segment adjacent to the fusion (p = 0.04). Derotation, according to Perdriolle, in the distal segment adjacent to the fusion was 6% in group S and 2% in group H.

We found no difference between correction of the thoracic and lumbar curves using pedicle screws and laminar hooks in the lumbar spine. Pedicle screws better maintained the correction of the lumbar curve and the lateral tilt in the distal segment adjacent to fusion.     

Comparative analysis of pedicle screw and hook instrumentation in posterior correction and fusion of idiopathic thoracic scoliosis

Posterior correction and fusion with segmental hook instrumentation represent the gold standard in the surgical treatment of progressive idiopathic thoracic scoliosis. However, there is a debate over whether pedicle screws are safe in scoliosis surgery and whether their usage might enable a better curve correction and a shorter fusion length. The details of curve correction, fusion length and complication rate of 99 patients with idiopathic thoracic scoliosis treated with either hook or pedicle screw instrumentation were analyzed. Forty-nine patients had been operated with the Cotrel-Dubousset system using hooks exclusively ("hook group"). Fifty patients had been operated with either a combination of pedicle screws in the lumbar and lower thoracic and hooks in the upper thoracic spine or exclusive pedicle screw instrumentation using the Münster Posterior Double Rod System ("screw group"). The preoperative Cobb angle averaged 61.3 degrees (range 40 degrees-84 degrees ) in the hook group and 62.5 degrees (range 43 degrees-94 degrees ) in the screw group. Average primary curve correction was 51.7% in the hook group and 55.8% in the screw group ( P>0.05). However, at follow-up (2-12 years later) primary curve correction was significantly greater ( P=0.001) in the screw group (at 50.1%) compared to the hook group (at 41.1%). Secondary lumbar curve correction was significantly greater ( P=0.04) in the screw group (54.9%) compared to the hook group (46.9%). Correction of the apical vertebral rotation according to Perdriolle was minimal in both groups. Apical vertebral translation was corrected by 42.0% in the hook group and 55.6% in the screw group ( P=0.008). Correction of the tilt of the lowest instrumented vertebra averaged 48.1% in the hook group and 66.2% in the screw group ( P=0.0004). There were no differences concerning correction of the sagittal plane deformity between the two groups. Fusion length was, on average, 0.6 segments shorter in the screw group compared to the hook group ( P=0.03). With pedicle screws, the lowest instrumented vertebra was usually one below the lower end vertebra, whereas in the hook group it was between one and two vertebrae below the lower end vertebra. Both operative time and intraoperative blood loss were significantly higher in the hook group ( P<0.0001). One pedicle screw at T5 was exchanged due to the direct proximity to the aorta. There were no neurologic complications related to pedicle screw instrumentation. Pedicle screw instrumentation alone or in combination with proximal hook instrumentation offers a significantly better primary and secondary curve correction in idiopathic thoracic scoliosis and enables a significantly shorter fusion length.     

内固定方式对青少年特发性脊柱侧凸选择性胸椎融合矢状面重建的影响

目的 探讨胸弯型青少年特发性脊柱侧凸患者行后路选择性胸椎融合术时采用不同内固定方式对胸椎矢状面形态及远端腰椎代偿模式的影响.方法 行胸弯后路矫形内同定术且有2年以上(2～3年)完整随访资料的lenke 1、2型青少年特发性脊柱侧凸患者51例,按内固定方式分为A组(全钩组)、B组(钩钉混合组)和C组(全钉组).测量术前及术后随访的胸弯Cobb角、腰弯Cobb角、胸椎后凸角、腰椎前凸角、远端交界性后凸、胸腰段交界性后凸及C7铅垂线偏离S1后上缘的距离.结果 三组患者主弯矫正率均大于60%,继发弯也获得较满意的自发性矫正.三组患者术前及随访中腰椎前凸角、C7铅垂线偏离S1后上缘的距离均保持正常.随访2年时,A组远端交界性后凸、胸椎后凸角、胸腰段交界性后凸分别达3.6°、23.0°、6.4°,其中远端交界性后凸与术前比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05).B组和C组各项指标与术前比较差异均无统计学意义.结论 全钩型同定可以获得良好的冠状面矫形,且在随访中能保持腰椎前凸和欠状面平衡.但钩的固定不如椎弓根螺钉牢固,全钩型固定患者胸椎后凸角有增大趋势,胸腰椎交界区有失代偿的可能.     

Pullout strength of pedicle screws versus pedicle and laminar hooks in the thoracic spine

While the biomechanical properties of pedicle screws have proven to be superior in the lumbar spine, little is known concerning pullout strength of pedicle screws in comparison to hooks in the thoracic spine. In vitro biomechanical pullout testing was performed to evaluate the axial pullout strength of pedicle screws versus pedicle and laminar hooks in the thoracic spine with regard to surgical correction techniques in scoliosis. Nine human cadaveric thoracic spines were harvested and disarticulated. To simulate a typical posterior segmental scoliosis instrumentation, standard pedicle hooks were used between T4 and T8 and supralaminar hooks between T9 and T12 and tested against pedicle screws. The pedicle screws were loaded strictly longitudinal to their axis; the hooks were loaded perpendicular to the intended rod direction. In total, 90 pullout tests were performed. Average pullout strength of the pedicle screws was significantly higher than in the hook group (T4-T8: 531 N versus 321 N, T9-T12: 807 N versus 600 N, p < 0.05). Both screw diameter and the bone mineral density (BMD) had significant influence on the pullout strength in the screw group. For scoliosis correction, pedicle screws might be beneficial, especially for rigid thoracic curves, since they are significantly more resistant to axial pullout than both pedicle and laminar hooks.     

Posterior fusion only for thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis of more than 80°: pedicle screws versus hybrid instrumentation

The treatment of thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) of more than 80° traditionally consisted of a combined procedure, an anterior release performed through an open thoracotomy followed by a posterior fusion. Recently, some studies have reassessed the role of posterior fusion only as treatment for severe thoracic AIS; the correction rate of the thoracic curves was comparable to most series of combined anterior and posterior surgery, with shorter surgery time and without the negative effect on pulmonary function of anterior transthoracic exposure. Compared with other studies published so far on the use of posterior fusion alone for severe thoracic AIS, the present study examines a larger group of patients (52 cases) reviewed at a longer follow-up (average 6.7 years, range 4.5–8.5 years). The aim of the study was to evaluate the clinical and radiographic outcome of surgical treatment for severe thoracic (>80°) AIS treated with posterior spinal fusion alone, and compare comprehensively the results of posterior fusion with a hybrid construct (proximal hooks and distal pedicle screws) versus a pedicle screw instrumentation. All patients (n = 52) with main thoracic AIS curves greater than 80° (Lenke type 1, 2, 3, and 4), surgically treated between 1996 and 2000 at one institution, by posterior spinal fusion either with hybrid instrumentation (PSF–H group; n = 27 patients), or with pedicle screw-only construct (PSF–S group; n = 25 patients) were reviewed. There were no differences between the two groups in terms of age, Risser’s sign, Cobb preoperative main thoracic (MT) curve magnitude (PSF–H: 92° vs. PSF–S: 88°), or flexibility on bending films (PSF–H: 27% vs. PSF–S: 25%). Statistical analysis was performed using the t test (paired and unpaired), Wilcoxon test for non-parametric paired analysis, and the Mann–Whitney test for non-parametric unpaired analysis. At the last follow-up, the PSF–S group, when compared to the PSF–H group had a final MT correction rate of 52.4 versus 44.52% (P = 0.001), with a loss of −1.9° versus −11.3° (P = 0.0005), a TL/L correction of 50 versus 43% (ns), a greater correction of the lowest instrumented vertebra translation (−1.00 vs. −0.54 cm; P = 0.04), and tilt (−19° vs. −10°; P = 0.005) on the coronal plane. There were no statistically significant differences in sagittal and global coronal alignment between the two groups (C7-S1 offset: PSF–H = 0.5 cm vs. PSF–S = 0 cm). In the hybrid series (27 patients) surgery-related complications necessitated three revision surgeries, whereas in the screw group (25 patients) one revision surgery was performed. No neurological complications or deep wound infection occurred in this series. In conclusion, posterior spinal fusion for severe thoracic AIS with pedicle screws only, when compared to hybrid construct, allowed a greater coronal correction of both main thoracic and secondary lumbar curves, less loss of the postoperative correction achieved, and fewer revision surgeries. Posterior-only fusion with pedicle screws enabled a good and stable correction of severe scoliosis. However, severe curves may be amenable to hybrid instrumentation that produced analogous results to the screws-only constructs concerning patient satisfaction; at the latest follow-up, SRS-30 and SF-36 scores did not show any statistical differences between the two groups. Presented at 8th Annual Meeting of the Spine Society of Europe, October 2006, Istanbul, Turkey.     

Dorsale operative Korrektur der idiopathischen Skoliose

Posterior correction and fusion of scoliosis with multisegmental instrumentation systems was developed by Cotrel-Dubousset in the 1980s. Initially correction and instrumentation was performed using hooks only. Later pedicle screws were implemented first for the lumbar and then for the thoracic spine. Nowadays instrumentation based on pedicle screws only is well established for posterior scoliosis surgery. Biomechanical studies demonstrated higher pull-out forces for pedicle than for hook constructs. In clinical studies several authors reported better Cobb angle correction of the primary and the secondary curves and less loss of correction in pedicle screw versus hook instrumentations. Furthermore, pedicle screw instrumentation allows fewer segments to be fused, especially caudally, and thus saving mobile segments. In most of these publications there were no differences in operation time, blood loss and complication rates. In summary, there is better curve correction without an increased risk using multisegmental pedicle screw instrumentation in modern posterior scoliosis surgery.     

Segmental pedicle screw instrumentation in idiopathic thoracolumbar and lumbar scoliosis

The role of posterior correction and fusion in thoracolumbar and lumbar scoliosis as well as pedicle screw instrumentation in scoliosis surgery are matters of debate. Our hypothesis was that in lumbar and thoracolumbar scoliosis, segmental pedicle screw instrumentation is safe and enables a good frontal and sagittal plane correction with a fusion length comparable to anterior instrumentation. In a prospective clinical trial, 12 consecutive patients with idiopathic thoracolumbar or lumbar scolioses of between 40° and 60° Cobb angle underwent segmental pedicle screw instrumentation. Minimum follow-up was 4 years (range 48– 60 months). Fusion length was defined according to the rules for Zielke instrumentation, normally ranging between the end vertebrae of the major curve. Radiometric analysis included coronal and sagittal plane correction. Additionally, the accuracy of pedicle screw placement was measured by use of postoperative computed tomographic scans. Major curve correction averaged 64.6%, with a loss of correction of 3°. The tilt angle was corrected by 67.0%, the compensatory thoracic curve corrected spontaneously according to the flexibility on the preoperative bending films, and led to a satisfactory frontal balance in all cases. Average fusion length was the same as that of the major curve. Pathological thoracolumbar kyphosis was completely corrected in all but one case. One patient required surgical revision with extension of the fusion to the midthoracic spine due to a painful junctional kyphosis. Eighty-five of 104 screws were graded “within the pedicle”, 10 screws had penetrated laterally, 5 screws bilaterally and 4 screws medially. No neurological complications were noted. In conclusion, despite the limited number of patients, this study shows that segmental pedicle screw instrumentation is a safe and effective procedure in the surgical correction of both frontal and sagittal plane deformity in thoracolumbar and lumbar scoliosis of less than 60°, with a short fusion length, comparable to anterior fusion techniques, and minimal loss of correction. Received: 23 September 1999 Revised: 20 January 2000 Accepted: 26 January 2000     

术中CT在后路全椎弓根螺钉治疗重度脊柱侧凸中的初步应用

目的:探讨术中CT在重度脊柱侧凸患者后路全椎弓根螺钉手术中的应用价值和临床疗效.方法:回顾性分析了2009年6月至201 1年6月行全椎弓根螺钉后路治疗的32例重度脊柱侧凸患者,其中男12例,女20例;年龄10～38岁,平均16.8岁;其中19例合并后凸.在术中椎弓根钉置钉完成后应用术中CT扫描多平面重建图像评估螺钉位置并分级,计算在上胸椎(T1-T4),中胸椎(T5-T8),下胸椎(T9-T12)和腰椎的螺钉评级结果及螺钉数目(比率),评估为2级和3级的螺钉为误置螺钉.计算术中应用CT次数.测量患者手术前后冠状面Cobb角及合并后凸病例手术前后矢状面后凸Cobb角,计算侧凸及后凸矫正率.结果:32例患者共置入胸腰椎螺钉686枚,其中胸椎螺钉544枚,腰椎螺钉142枚,其中14例患者行截骨手术.经术中CT评估分级,在上胸椎、中胸椎、下胸椎和腰椎的误置螺钉率分别是5.6％,11.1％,6.7％和4.3％,在胸腰椎总计是7.3％,误置螺钉在术中进行了修正.术中平均应用CT 2.6次(2～4次).术前侧凸Cobb角平均95°(78°～123°),术后侧凸Cobb角平均为34°(19°～53°),矫正率为64％;合并后凸病例术前后凸Cobb角69°(46°～82°),术后后凸Cobb角平均为32°(22°～45°),矫正率为54％.术后有4例患者脑脊液漏,未发现神经血管损伤病例及手术伤口感染病例.所有病例获得随访,时间12～26个月,平均18个月.未发现断钉、断棒、假关节形成等并发症发生.结论:在重度脊柱侧凸全椎弓根螺钉后路手术中应用术中CT可及时发现误置螺钉并进行修正,避免了因螺钉误置导致的二次手术,保障了手术安全,手术效果良好.     

Correlative analysis of the results of surgical treatment of thoracolumbar injuries with long Texas Scottish rite hospital construct: is the use of pedicle screws versus hooks advantageous in the lumbar spine?

This is a prospective, randomized study to compare the efficacy of two similar "long-segment" Texas Scottish Rite Hospital instrumentations with the use of hooks in the thoracic spine and pedicle screws versus laminar hook claw in the lumbar spine for thoracolumbar A3, B, and C injuries. Forty consecutive patients with such thoracolumbar fractures (T11-L1) associated with spinal canal encroachment underwent early operative postural reduction and stabilization. The patients were randomly sampled into two groups: Twenty patients received hooks in "claw configuration" in both the thoracic and the lumbar spine (group A), and 20 patients received hooks in the thoracic vertebrae and pedicle screws in the lumbar vertebrae (group B). Pre- and postoperative plain roentgenograms and computed tomography scans were used to evaluate any changes in Gardner post-traumatic kyphotic deformity, anterior and posterior vertebral body height at the fracture level, and spinal canal clearance (SCC). All patients were followed for an average period of 52 months (range 42-71 months). The correction of anterior vertebral body height was significantly more (P < 0.01) in the spines of group B (33%) than in group A (16%), with a subsequent 11% loss of correction at the latest evaluation in group A and no loss of correction in group B. There were no significant differences in the changes of posterior vertebral body height and Gardner angle between the two groups. The SCC was significantly more (P < 0.05) immediately postoperatively in the spine of group B (32%) than in group A (19%). In the latest evaluation, there was a 9% loss of the immediately postoperatively achieved SCC in group A, while SCC was furthermore increased at 10.5% in group B. All patients with incomplete neurologic lesions in groups A and B were postoperatively improved at 1.1 and 1.7 levels, respectively. There were two hook dislodgements in the thoracic spine, one in each group, while there was no screw failure in group B. There was neither pseudarthrosis nor neurologic deterioration following surgery. Visual Analog Pain Scale and Short Form-36 scores were equally improved and did not differ between the two groups. The use of pedicle screws in the lumbar spine to stabilize the lowermost end of a long rigid construct applied for A3, B, and C thoracolumbar injuries was advantageous when compared with that using hook claws in the lumbar spine because the constructs with screws restored and maintained the fractured anterior vertebral body height better than the hooks without subsequent loss of correction and safeguarded postoperatively a continuous SCC at the injury level.     

Thoracic curve correction after posterior fusion and instrumentation of structural lumbar curves in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis

Introduction

Spontaneous thoracic curve correction may occur following selective anterior spinal fusion in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). However, a few reports have described outcomes in patients following selective posterior fusion. The aim of this retrospective study was to assess curve correction in AIS patients with major lumbar curves and secondary thoracic curves after selective posterior fusion of the major curve.

Methods

The records of 42 AIS patients with major lumbar and minor thoracic curves who had received selective posterior lumbar fusion with segmental pedicle screw fixation were examined. Preoperative and follow-up radiographs were examined and the following were determined: curve flexibility, Cobb angle measurements of the major and minor curves, thoracolumbar/lumbar and thoracic Cobb measurements. Also, thoracolumbar/lumbar to thoracic Cobb ratios were determined. Minimum follow-up was 2?years. Patients were compared with respect to whether final thoracic curve improvement was (group A) or was not (group B) apparent. Improvement was indicated by a final thoracic curve that was less than the preoperative thoracic curve.

Results

Thoracic curve improvement was apparent in 32 of 42 patients after surgery. The mean preoperative thoracic curve in group A was 22.5° and 15.0° at follow-up, while corresponding values in group B were 35.0° and 39.8°. There were no cases in group A and eight cases in group B in which the preoperative thoracic curve was >30°. All patients in group B had preoperative thoracic curves on lateral bending >20°. Thoracic curvature at final follow-up was strongly correlated with preoperative thoracic curvature (r?=?0.911) and thoracic curvature on lateral bending (r?=?0.948).

Conclusions

Selective posterior fusion with segmental pedicle screw fixation in patients with major lumbar AIS resulted in curve correction in the majority of cases. Preoperative thoracic curvature and thoracic curvature on lateral bending were strongly correlated with the final thoracic curvature.     

Correction of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis using thoracic pedicle screw fixation versus hook constructs

This retrospective study was undertaken to determine the effectiveness and cost of thoracic pedicle screws versus laminar and pedicle hooks in patients undergoing surgical correction of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). Immediate preoperative and 6-week postoperative radiographs were examined in 25 consecutive cases of children with AIS who were divided into two groups, those with thoracic pedicle screw constructs and those with thoracic hook constructs. Endpoints collected included radiographic measures, complications, surgical time, implant cost, and quality-of-life measures. Ten children underwent spinal fusion using thoracic pedicle screw fixation and 15 underwent thoracic constructs composed of hooks. Similar sex and age distribution were noted in both groups, and among the 20 girls and 5 boys the average age was 14.5. The mean preoperative Cobb angle was 53.5 degrees for the screw group and 52.5 degrees for the hook group. Correction averaged 70.2% for the screw group and 68.1% for the hook group. There were no significant differences between the two patient groups in terms of percentage of or absolute curve change after surgery. The apical vertebral translation, end vertebral tilt angle, and coronal balance did not differ significantly between the two patient groups. Comparison of operative time and quality of life revealed no significant differences. Screw constructs were significantly more expensive than hook constructs. The correction obtained from thoracic pedicle screw fixation is comparable to traditional hook constructs in AIS. Surgery using either construct effectively corrects AIS.     

Junction kinematics between proximal mobile and distal fused lumbar segments: biomechanical analysis of pedicle and hook constructs

Background contextBiomechanical studies have demonstrated increased motion in motion segments adjacent to instrumentation or arthrodesis. The effects of different configurations of hook and pedicle screw instrumentation on the biomechanical behaviors of adjacent segments have not been well documented.PurposeTo compare the effect of three different fusion constructs on adjacent segment motion proximal to lumbar arthrodesis.MethodsSeven human cadaver lumbar spines were tested in the following conditions: 1) intact; 2) L4–L5-simulated circumferential fusion (CF); 3) L4–L5-simulated fusion extended to L3 with pedicle screws; and 4) L4–L5-simulated fusion extended to L3 with sublaminar hooks. Rotation data at L2–L3, L3–L4, and L4–L5 were analyzed using both load limit control (±7.5 N·m) and displacement limit control (truncated to the greatest common angular motion of the segments for each specimen).ResultsBoth the L3–L4 and L2–L3 motion segments above the L4–L5-simulated CF had significantly increased motion in all loading planes compared with the intact spine, but no significant differences were found between L3–L4 and L2–L3 motion. When the L3–L4 segment was stabilized with pedicle screws, its motion was significantly smaller in flexion, lateral bending, and axial rotation than when stabilized with sublaminar hooks. At the same time, L2–L3 motion was significantly larger in flexion, lateral bending, and axial rotation in the pedicle screw model compared with the sublaminar hook construct.ConclusionsThe use of sublaminar hooks to stabilize the motion segment above a circumferential lumbar fusion reduced motion at the next cephalad segment compared with a similar construct using pedicle screws. The semiconstrained hook enhancement may be considered if a patient is at a risk of adjacent segment disorders.     

全椎弓根螺钉与钉钩联合系统治疗青少年Chiari畸形伴胸椎侧凸的疗效比较

 目的 评估青少年Chiari畸形伴胸椎侧凸不同内固定模式的选择对手术疗效的影响。 方法 回顾性分析2001年3月至2011年3月期间,接受后路胸椎融合术的75例Chiari畸形伴脊柱侧凸患者的病历资料,根据内固定方式分为全椎弓根螺钉组(44例)和钉钩联合组(31例)。分别测量术前、术后以及末次随访时的影像学指标：冠状面侧凸Cobb角、侧凸柔韧性、顶椎偏移、顶椎旋转及躯干偏移;矢状面胸椎后凸角、腰椎前凸角、躯干偏移及近端与远端交界区Cobb角。比较两组术前、术后及末次随访时上述影像学指标的改变。根据术前不同程度胸椎后凸进一步分组,比较两种内固定模式的手术疗效。结果 全椎弓根螺钉组术后胸弯平均矫正率为60.2％,明显著高于钉钩联合组(51.3％,t=2.372,P=0.023)。末次随访时全椎弓根螺钉组及钉钩联合组胸弯矫正丢失率分别为0.3％及1.7％(t=-0.468,P >0.05)。术后腰弯平均矫正率在全椎弓根螺钉组为61.7％,明显优于钉钩联合组51.1％(t=2.431,P=0.020)。术前全椎弓根螺钉组与钉钩联合组的胸弯顶椎偏移分别平均为25.0 mm和24.1 mm,术后减小至6.9 mm和7.4 mm,两组术后的胸弯顶椎偏移均获得明显改善。术前胸椎后凸>40°的病例中,全椎弓根螺钉组末次随访时矢状面近端交界区Cobb角为10.0°,高于钉钩联合组(4.5°,t=-2.031,P=0.052)。而且全椎弓根螺钉组近端交界性后凸发生率(20% )高于钉钩联合组(9%)。结论 对继发于青少年Chiari畸形的胸椎侧凸行后路内固定矫形,全椎弓根螺钉具有更好的畸形矫正率,但是,与钉钩联合固定相比,术前胸椎过度后凸的患者在胸椎全椎弓根螺钉固定术后远期发生近端交界性后凸的风险增高。     

Adolescent idiopathic thoracic scoliosis: apical correction with specialized pedicle hooks

Forty-one patients with thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) treated with only a posterior spine fusion using specialized pedicle hooks (SPH) (hooks augmented with 3.2-mm screws) at the apex of the curve were reviewed in order to assess the effectiveness of this correction method. Inclusion in the study group required a minimum of 2 years’ follow-up and the same strategy of correction where the apical vertebrae (3 or 4 vertebrae on the concave side) were instrumented with SPH. The mean preoperative Cobb angle was corrected from 55° (42°–80°) to 18° (67%) postoperatively and to 23° (58%) at the last follow-up (28–50 months) for a flexibility index of 46%. Apical vertebral translation was corrected to 70% at the last follow-up. Thoracic kyphosis remained unchanged, from 23° to 26°, and the lumbar lordosis went from –53° to –59°. The lumbar curve was corrected from 38° to 18°. Coronal balance improved from 10 to 1 mm; shoulder balance was improved from 15 to 5 mm. The rib hump was improved from an average of 30 mm preoperatively to 15 mm postoperatively, but only to 25 mm at the last follow-up (17% of correction). One case of a spastic bladder was observed postoperatively, which resolved completely after 8 months. Three patients had to have their instrumentation removed because of pain. There was no complication related to the use of the SPH. The authors conclude that apical correction with SPH allows effective scoliosis correction without spinal distraction and does not require supra- or infralaminar hook in the spinal canal. Received: 1 July 1998 Revised: 25 March 1999 Accepted: 21 April 1999     

2- to 4-year outcome of dorsal double rod instrumentation spondylodesis in idiopathic scoliosis]

INTRODUCTION: In order to evaluate the results of posterior correction and fusion using the Münster Posterior Doublerod-System (MPDS) 48 patients with idiopathic scoliosis were studied prospectively. METHODS: All patients underwent clinical examination and radiological analysis of the frontal and sagittal plane preoperatively, postoperatively and at follow-up (2-4 years). Pedicle screws were used at the lumbar and thoracolumbar spine exclusively. RESULTS: The preoperative average Cobb angle was 61.4 degrees with an average flexibility of 36.8% to 38.8 degrees. The average postoperative Cobb angle was 24.8 degrees (59.6%) with an average loss of correction of 2.6 degrees Cobb angle (3.6%). Due to the use of thoracolumbar and lumbar pedicle screws instrumented fusion could be stopped at the lower endvertebra in 71%. Patients in whom only pedicle screws had been used improved correction of frontal plane could be shown compared to combined instrumentations with hooks and screws. CONCLUSION: The posterior instrumentation guarantees primary stability with good results of correction and allows brace free treatment postoperatively. The postoperative correction compared to the results at follow-up proves the stability of the instrumentation largely. The results of mainly pedicle screw based instrumentations verify that an improved correction can be achieved. In most cases fusion levels end at the lower end vertebra and therefore are shorter compared to instrumentation's based on hooks only.     

Comparative analysis of pedicle screw versus hybrid instrumentation in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis surgery

The expectations of both the patient and surgeon have been greatly revised in the last 10 years with the introduction of pedicle screws (PS) in spinal surgery. In this study, we have retrospectively evaluated and compared the results of PS instrumentation and the Hybrid System (HS), the latter consists of pedicle screws, sublaminar wire and hooks. The mean follow-up period was 60.1 months (range: 49-94 months) for the patients of the HS group and 29.3 months (range: 24-35 months) for those of the PS group. In the HS group, pedicle screws were used at the thoracolumbar junction and lumbar vertebra, the bilateral pediculotransverse claw hook configuration was used at the cranial end of the instrumentation, sublaminar wire was used on the concave side of the apical region and the compressive hook was used on the convex side. In the PS group, PS were used on the concave sides at all levels and on the convex side of the cranial and caudal end of instrumentation, in the transition zone and at the apex. The two groups were comparable for variables such as mean age, preoperative Cobb angle, thoracic kyphosis angle, lordosis angle, coronal balance, flexibility of the curve, apical vertebra rotation (AVR), apical vertebra rotation (AVT) and the number of vertebrae included in the fusion (p > 0.05). The parameters of values of correction, ratio of correction loss, AV derotation, AVT correction ratio, amount of blood loss, operation time, postoperative global coronal and sagittal balance, thoracic kyphosis angle and lumbar lordosis angle were measured at the last follow-up and used for comparing the HS and PS groups. There was no statistically significant difference between the groups for correction ratio, postoperative coronal balance, postoperative thoracic kyphosis and lumbar lordosis angle, operation time, amount of blood loss and number of fixation points (p > 0.05) The difference for the ratio of correction loss, AV derotation angle and the AVT correction ratio at the last follow-up visit and for the total follow-up period between the groups was found to be statistically significant (p < 0.05). Although it is possible to obtain a similar amount of correction by either instrumentation system, the loss of correction seems to be lower with the more rigid PS construction. The PS system also has a stronger effect on vertebral bodies, thereby providing better AV de-rotation. There was no significant difference (p > 0.05) between the groups in terms of correction rate, postoperative coronal and sagittal balance, operation time, blood loss and number of fixation points. This may indicate that anchor points are more important than the use - or not - of screws. Correction durability and AV de-rotation was better with PS instrumentation, while AVT was better corrected by HS instrumentation (p < 0.05). We propose that the reason for the better correction of AVT with HS instrumentation is the forceful translation offered by the sublaminar wire at the apical region, while the reason for the better correction durability of the PS instrumentation may be due to the fact that multiple pedicle screws which afford three-column control are better at maintaining the correction and preventing late deterioration.     

Simultaneous translation on two rods is an effective method for correction of hypokyphosis in AIS: radiographic results of 24 hypokyphotic thoracic scoliosis with 2 years minimum follow-up

Recent publications confirm that moderate correction of thoracic hypokyphosis can be achieved by posterior instrumentation with hooks or pedicle screws. Twenty-four prospective and consecutive thoracic adolescent scoliosis patients with hypokyphosis (<20°) were operated on by posterior spinal fusion (PSF) with a specific method of reduction: Simultaneous translation on two rods (ST2R), performed by the same surgeon using stable anchorages such as screws or self-stabilizing claws. Radiographic parameters were measured preoperatively, at 1 month, 1 year and at 2 years minimum follow-up. In the coronal plane, the average main curve was significantly reduced from 51° to 17° and maintained at last follow-up, corresponding to an average correction of 67%. In the sagittal plane, the average kyphosis angle was significantly improved from 9° to 30° postoperatively and to 32° at last follow-up, corresponding to a mean gain of 23°. The 24 patients reported normal kyphosis at last follow-up (≥20°). Reduction of scoliosis by ST2R is an effective method that gives coronal correction equivalent to all screw constructs and allows restoration of normal thoracic kyphosis.     

Short fusion versus long fusion for degenerative lumbar scoliosis

The extent of fusion for degenerative lumbar scoliosis has not yet been determined. The purpose of this study was to compare the results of short fusion versus long fusion for degenerative lumbar scoliosis. Fifty patients (mean age 65.5 ± 5.1 years) undergoing decompression and fusion with pedicle screw instrumentation were evaluated. Short fusion was defined as fusion within the deformity, not exceeding the end vertebra. Long fusion was defined as fusion extended above the upper end vertebra. The lower end vertebra was included in the fusion in all the patients. The short fusion group included 28 patients and the long fusion group included 22 patients. Patients’ age and number of medical co-morbidities were similar in both the groups. The number of levels fused was 3.1 ± 0.9 segments in the short fusion group and 6.5 ± 1.5 in the long fusion group. Before surgery, the average Cobb angle was 16.3° (range 11–28°) in the short fusion group and 21.7° (range 12–33°) in the long fusion group. The correction of the Cobb angle averaged 39% in the short fusion group and 72% in the long fusion group with a statistical difference (P = 0.001). Coronal imbalance improved significantly in the long fusion group more than in the short fusion group (P = 0.03). The correction of lateral listhesis was better in the long fusion group (P = 0.02). However, there was no difference in the correction of lumbar lordosis and sagittal imbalance between the two groups. Ten of the 50 patients had additional posterolateral lumbar interbody fusion at L4-5 or L5-S1. The interbody fusion had a positive influence in improving lumbar lordosis, but was ineffective at restoring sagittal imbalance. Early perioperative complications were likely to develop in the long fusion group. Late complications included adjacent segment disease, loosening of screws, and pseudarthrosis. Adjacent segment disease developed in ten patients in the short fusion group, and in five patients in the long fusion group. In the short fusion group, adjacent segment disease occurred proximally in all of the ten patients. Loosening of distal screws developed in three patients, and pseudarthrosis at L5-S1 in one patient in the long fusion group. Reoperation was performed in four patients in the long fusion group and three patients in the short fusion group. In conclusion, short fusion is sufficient for patients with small Cobb angle and good spinal balance. For patients with severe Cobb angle and rotatory subluxation, long fusion should be carried out to minimize adjacent segment disease. For patients who have severe sagittal imbalance, spinal osteotomy is an alternative technique to be considered. As long fusion is likely to increase early perioperative complications, great care should be taken for high-risk patients to avoid complications.     

Triggered electromyographic threshold for accuracy of thoracic pedicle screw placement in a porcine model.

STUDY DESIGN: A porcine model of thoracic pedicle screw insertion was used to determine the effect of screw position on triggered electromyographic response. OBJECTIVE: To develop a model of intraoperative detection of misplaced thoracic pedicle screws. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Triggered electromyographic stimulation has been a valuable aid in determining appropriate placement of lumbar pedicle screws. The use of pedicle screws is increasing in the thoracic spine. Misplaced thoracic pedicle screws may have significant implications if the spinal cord is injured. This study was an attempt to determine whether the established lumbar model can be used for thoracic pedicle screws. METHODS: Five 120- to 150-lb domestic pigs had 85 pedicle screws placed bilaterally in the thoracic spine at each level from T6 to T15. Screws were inserted entirely in the pedicle (Group A). After removal of the medial pedicle wall, the screws were reinserted in the pedicle with no neural contact (Group B). The screws were then placed with purposeful contact with the neural elements (Group C). The screws were stimulated, eliciting an electromyographic response in the intercostal muscles for each instrumented level. The type of response noted was classified as either primary (response from appropriate nerve root), secondary (response at different root) or no response (response at different root, no response at appropriate root). RESULTS: Two hundred fifty responses were recorded. A primary response was noted in 72% of recordings. There was a relatively consistent decrease in the triggered electromyographic response from Group A (mean 4.15 +/- 1.80 mA) to Group C (mean 3.02 +/- 2.53 mA) screws (P = 0.0003). There was little difference in the response obtained from Group A to Group B (mean 4.37 +/- 2.48 mA) screws (P > 0.05). When a primary response was recorded, the mean threshold electromyographic response recorded was significantly lower than recordings with secondary and no response recordings (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Even though there was a consistent decrease between the A and C screws that was more definitively separated when a primary response was elicited, it was not possible to determine a cutoff trigger electromyographic level that would consistently differentiate intraosseous from epidural pedicle screw placement. Furthermore, this method could not differentiate screws clearly in the pedicle from screws with medial pedicle wall breakthrough. A more direct method of spinal cord monitoring must be established to provide the surgeon with early warning of the potential of neural injury in the placement of thoracic pedicle screws.