A Novel Posterior Multiple Screws Distraction Reducer System Versus Anterior Release, Posterior Internal Distraction, and Subsequent Spinal Fusion for Severe Scoliosis

Overview

Journal BMC Musculoskelet Disord

Publisher Biomed Central

Specialties Orthopedics
Physiology

Date 2021 Feb 6

PMID 33546654

Citations 1

Authors

Ganjun Feng

Yong Huang

Leizhen Huang

Yongliang Wang

Juehan Wang

Chunguang Zhou

Lei Wang

Zhongjie Zhou

Xi Yang

Limin Liu

Yueming Song

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: We previously reported anterior release, posterior internal distraction, and subsequent spinal fusion (ARPIDF) for the correction of severe scoliosis with a satisfactory correction rate. However, surgical procedures were completed in 2-3 stages. Here we compare Cobb angle of ≥90° in scoliosis correction between a novel posterior multiple screws distraction reducer (MSDR) system and ARPIDF.

Methods: Thirty-six patients with severe scoliosis treated by MSDR or ARPIDF (n = 18 in both groups). We retrospectively analyzed and compared outcome measures between the two groups over a minimum follow-up duration of 2 years. The following variables were compared between the two groups: age at surgery, sex, etiology, flexibility of the main thoracic curve, number of fused segments and screws, operation time, estimated blood loss, hospitalization time, follow-up duration, various radiological parameters, complication rate, and Scoliosis Research Society-30 score.

Results: There were no significant between-group differences with respect to age, sex, etiology, flexibility of the main thoracic curve, number of fused segments and screws, and follow-up duration. Further, there was no significant difference in terms of preoperative, postoperative, and final follow-up findings of the radiographic data. However, the ARPIDF group had longer operation and hospitalization times and greater blood loss. In the ARPIDF group, 4 patient developed complications (infection, intraoperative neuromonitoring changes, transient dyspnea); none of these events occurred in the MSDR group.

Conclusion: The use of MSDR helped achieve greater scoliosis correction with a shorter operation time, lower blood loss, and lower complication rate than the use of ARPIDF. MSDR facilitates safer and easier correction of severe scoliosis without increasing surgical risk.

Citing Articles

A Novel Multiple Screw Distraction Reducer System in the Treatment of Scoliosis with a Severe Rib Hump.

Deng Z, Wang L, Liu L, Wang L, Yang X, Song Y Orthop Surg. 2023; 16(1):47-56.

PMID: 38010853 PMC: 10782260. DOI: 10.1111/os.13943.

References

Zhang H, Sucato D . A Novel Posterior Rod-Link-Reducer System Provides Safer, Easier, and Better Correction of Severe Scoliosis. Spine Deform. 2019; 7(3):445-453. DOI: 10.1016/j.jspd.2018.09.001. View

Suk S, Chung E, Lee S, Lee J, Kim S, Kim J . Posterior vertebral column resection in fixed lumbosacral deformity. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005; 30(23):E703-10. DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000188190.90034.be. View

Lenke L, Sides B, Koester L, Hensley M, Blanke K . Vertebral column resection for the treatment of severe spinal deformity. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009; 468(3):687-99. PMC: 2816784. DOI: 10.1007/s11999-009-1037-x. View

Bullmann V, Halm H, Schulte T, Lerner T, Weber T, Liljenqvist U . Combined anterior and posterior instrumentation in severe and rigid idiopathic scoliosis. Eur Spine J. 2006; 15(4):440-8. PMC: 3489309. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-005-1016-1. View

Shen J, Qiu G, Wang Y, Zhang Z, Zhao Y . Comparison of 1-stage versus 2-stage anterior and posterior spinal fusion for severe and rigid idiopathic scoliosis--a randomized prospective study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2006; 31(22):2525-8. DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000240704.42264.c4. View

Wang Y, Xie J, Zhao Z, Li T, Zhang Y, Bi N . Preoperative short-term traction prior to posterior vertebral column resection: procedure and role. Eur Spine J. 2015; 25(3):687-97. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-014-3752-6. View

Watanabe K, Lenke L, Bridwell K, Kim Y, Hensley M, Koester L . Efficacy of perioperative halo-gravity traction for treatment of severe scoliosis (≥100°). J Orthop Sci. 2010; 15(6):720-30. DOI: 10.1007/s00776-010-1523-8. View

Zhou C, Liu L, Song Y, Feng G, Yang X, Wang L . Comparison of anterior and posterior vertebral column resection versus anterior and posterior spinal fusion for severe and rigid scoliosis. Spine J. 2017; 18(6):948-953. DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2017.10.001. View

Cheng M, Ma H, Lin H, Chou P, Wang S, Liu C . Anterior release may not be necessary for idiopathic scoliosis with a large curve of more than 75° and a flexibility of less than 25. Spine J. 2017; 18(5):769-775. DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2017.09.001. View

10.

Li Z, Lei F, Xiu P, Yang X, Wang L, Feng G . Surgical treatment for severe and rigid scoliosis: a case-matched study between idiopathic scoliosis and syringomyelia-associated scoliosis. Spine J. 2018; 19(1):87-94. DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2018.05.027. View

11.

Mehlman C, Al-Sayyad M, Crawford A . Effectiveness of spinal release and halo-femoral traction in the management of severe spinal deformity. J Pediatr Orthop. 2004; 24(6):667-73. DOI: 10.1097/00004694-200411000-00014. View

12.

Shufflebarger H, Grimm J, Bui V, Thomson J . Anterior and posterior spinal fusion. Staged versus same-day surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1991; 16(8):930-3. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-199108000-00011. View

13.

Bekmez S, Ozhan M, Olgun Z, Suzer A, Ayvaz M, Demirkiran H . Pedicle Subtraction Osteotomy Versus Multiple Posterior Column Osteotomies in Severe and Rigid Neuromuscular Scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2018; 43(15):E905-E910. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000002538. View

14.

Kurucan E, Bernstein D, Ying M, Li Y, Menga E, Sponseller P . Trends in spinal deformity surgery in Marfan syndrome. Spine J. 2019; 19(12):1934-1940. DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2019.08.005. View

15.

Hu H, Hui H, Zhang H, Huang D, Liu Z, Zhao Y . The impact of posterior temporary internal distraction on stepwise corrective surgery for extremely severe and rigid scoliosis greater than 130°. Eur Spine J. 2015; 25(2):557-68. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-015-4013-z. View

16.

Suk S, Chung E, Kim J, Kim S, Lee J, Choi W . Posterior vertebral column resection for severe rigid scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005; 30(14):1682-7. DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000170590.21071.c1. View

17.

Zhou C, Liu L, Song Y, Liu H, Li T, Gong Q . Anterior release internal distraction and posterior spinal fusion for severe and rigid scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2013; 38(22):E1411-7. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3182a3cd90. View

18.

Ren C, Liu L, Song Y, Zhou C, Liu H, Li T . Comparison of anterior and posterior vertebral column resection versus anterior release with posterior internal distraction for severe and rigid scoliosis. Eur Spine J. 2014; 23(6):1237-43. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-014-3270-6. View

19.

Tokunaga M, Minami S, Kitahara H, Isobe K, Nakata Y, Moriya H . Vertebral decancellation for severe scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000; 25(4):469-74. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-200002150-00013. View

20.

Zhou C, Liu L, Song Y, Liu H, Zeng J, Yang X . Anterior release posterior internal distraction and subsequent posterior spinal fusion for the treatment of severe kyphoscoliosis. Eur Spine J. 2015; 24(7):1560-7. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-015-3902-5. View