Comparison of 5-year outcomes between pedicle screw and hybrid constructs in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

OBJECT Pedicle screw fixation has been theorized to provide better correction of scoliotic deformity, but controversy over the benefits of pedicle screw-only constructs remains, and the longer-term impact of pedicle screw fixation as compared with hybrid constructs is unclear. In this study, a retrospective review of a prospectively collected database was conducted to determine the longer-term impact of pedicle screw fixation as compared with hybrid constructs in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). METHODS The authors retrospectively reviewed a multicenter database of pediatric patients (ages ≤ 18) from 1995 to 2006 and identified 127 patients with Lenke Type 1-4 AIS curves with a minimum 5 years of follow-up. Patients were divided into 2 cohorts based on whether they had undergone pedicle screw fixation or fixation with hybrid constructs. RESULTS The mean main thoracic curvature of 56.1° ± 13.0°, which corrected to 14.9° ± 9.3°, translated into a mean correction of 73% (p < 0.01). The curve was 19.4° ± 10.6° at 2-year follow-up and 20.5° ± 10.4° at 5 years. When comparing preoperative parameters between the groups, differences were noted in the magnitude of the main thoracic curve (p = 0.04), flexibility of the main thoracic curve (p = 0.02), coronal balance (p = 0.04), T2-12 kyphosis (p = 0.02), and sex (p = 0.02). The pedicle screw cohort had fewer spinal segments instrumented (p < 0.01), fewer anterior releases performed (p = 0.02), and fewer thoracoplasties performed (p < 0.01). By 5 years of follow-up, significant differences were apparent between the two cohorts with respect to upper thoracic curvature (p = 0.01), T2-12 (p = 0.02) and T5-12 (p = 0.02) kyphosis, lumbar lordosis (p < 0.01), and sagittal balance (p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS Although some preoperative differences did exist, outcomes were comparable between hybrid and screw constructs at 2 and 5 years. However, hybrid constructs required more concurrent anterior releases and thoracoplasties to achieve similar results.

[1]  A. Zerbi,et al.  Role of rod diameter in comparison between only screws versus hooks and screws in posterior instrumentation of thoracic curve in idiopathic scoliosis , 2011, European Spine Journal.

[2]  M. Gibson,et al.  Correction of Main Thoracic Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Using Pedicle Screw Instrumentation: Does Higher Implant Density Improve Correction? , 2010, Spine.

[3]  R. Betz,et al.  Evaluation of Proximal Junctional Kyphosis in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Following Pedicle Screw, Hook, or Hybrid Instrumentation , 2010, Spine.

[4]  R. Betz,et al.  Correlation of Scoliosis Curve Correction With the Number and Type of Fixation Anchors , 2009, Spine.

[5]  K. Wood,et al.  Subjective evaluation of treatment outcomes of instrumentation with pedicle screws or hybrid constructs in Lenke Type 1 and 2 adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: what happens when judges are blinded to the instrumentation? , 2009, European Spine Journal.

[6]  E. Ameri,et al.  Radiographic outcome of surgical treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis in males versus females , 2008, Scoliosis.

[7]  F. Lolli,et al.  Posterior fusion only for thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis of more than 80°: pedicle screws versus hybrid instrumentation , 2008, European Spine Journal.

[8]  S. Suk,et al.  Thoracoplasty in Thoracic Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis , 2008, Spine.

[9]  M. Tezer,et al.  Comparative analysis of pedicle screw versus hybrid instrumentation in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis surgery , 2008, International Orthopaedics.

[10]  Harald Steen,et al.  Idiopathic Scoliosis Treated With Cotrel-Dubousset Instrumentation: Evaluation 10 Years After Surgery , 2007, Spine.

[11]  L. Lenke,et al.  Surgical Revision Rates of Hooks Versus Hybrid Versus Screws Versus Combined Anteroposterior Spinal Fusion for Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis , 2007, Spine.

[12]  L. Lenke,et al.  A Pedicle Screw Construct Gives an Enhanced Posterior Correction of Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis When Compared With Other Constructs: Myth or Reality , 2007, Spine.

[13]  R. Betz,et al.  Outcomes of Surgical Treatment in Male Versus Female Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Patients , 2007, Spine.

[14]  Francis Y. Lee,et al.  Coronal and Sagittal Plane Correction in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis: A Comparison Between All Pedicle Screw Versus Hybrid Thoracic Hook Lumbar Screw Constructs , 2007, Spine.

[15]  L. Lenke,et al.  Selective Posterior Thoracic Fusions for Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis: Comparison of Hooks Versus Pedicle Screws , 2006, Spine.

[16]  M. Andersen,et al.  Outcome at 10 Years After Treatment for Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis , 2006, Spine.

[17]  Samuel K. Cho,et al.  Proximal Junctional Kyphosis in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Following Segmental Posterior Spinal Instrumentation and Fusion: Minimum 5-Year Follow-up , 2005, Spine.

[18]  Sang-Min Lee,et al.  Selective Thoracic Fusion With Segmental Pedicle Screw Fixation in the Treatment of Thoracic Idiopathic Scoliosis: More than 5-Year Follow-Up , 2005, Spine.

[19]  Francis Y. Lee,et al.  Correction of Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Using Thoracic Pedicle Screw Fixation Versus Hook Constructs , 2005, Journal of pediatric orthopedics.

[20]  Samuel K. Cho,et al.  Comparative Analysis of Pedicle Screw Versus Hybrid Instrumentation in Posterior Spinal Fusion of Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis , 2004, Spine.

[21]  A. Nachemson,et al.  Back Pain and Function 23 Years After Fusion for Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis: A Case-Control Study—Part II , 2003, Spine.

[22]  R. Hsu,et al.  Pulmonary Function After Thoracoplasty in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis , 2002, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[23]  U. Liljenqvist,et al.  Comparative analysis of pedicle screw and hook instrumentation in posterior correction and fusion of idiopathic thoracic scoliosis , 2002, European Spine Journal.

[24]  L. Lenke,et al.  Complications and predictive factors for the successful treatment of flatback deformity (fixed sagittal imbalance). , 1999, Spine.

[25]  Se Ii Suk,et al.  Segmental pedicle screw fixation in the treatment of thoracic idiopathic scoliosis. , 1995 .

[26]  M. Nordin,et al.  Low Back Pain in Schoolchildren A Study of Familial and Psychological Factors , 1995, Spine.

[27]  L. Lenke,et al.  Analysis of Pulmonary Function and Chest Cage Dimension Changes After Thoracoplasty in Idiopathic Scoliosis , 1995, Spine.

[28]  D. Bradford,et al.  Current concepts and management of patients with fixed decompensated spinal deformity. , 1994, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[29]  H. Shufflebarger,et al.  Internal Thoracoplasty: A New Procedure , 1994, Spine.

[30]  V. Tolo,et al.  Outcome of Wisconsin Instrumentation in Idiopathic Scoliosis: Minimum 5‐Year Follow‐Up , 1993, Spine.

[31]  R. Betz,et al.  Are There Indications for Partial Rib Resection in Patients with Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Treated with Cotrel‐Dubousset Instrumentation? , 1993, Spine.

[32]  R J Jefferson,et al.  Quantifying the cosmetic defect of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. , 1993, Spine.

[33]  K. Wood,et al.  Rotational Changes of the Vertebral‐Pelvic Axis Following Cotrel‐Dubousset Instrumentation , 1991, Spine.

[34]  R. Betz,et al.  Computer Tomography Evaluation of Cotrel‐Dubousset Instrumentation in Idiopathic Scoliosis , 1988, Spine.

[35]  D. Benson,et al.  The rib deformity in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. A prospective study to evaluate changes after Harrington distraction and posterior fusion. , 1987, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[36]  L. Irstam,et al.  Long-Term Anatomic and Functional Changes in Patients with Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Treated by Harrington Rod Fusion , 1983, Spine.

[37]  H. Steel.  Rib resection and spine fusion in correction of convex deformity in scoliosis. , 1983, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.