Comparison of different strategies on three-dimensional correction of AIS: which plane will suffer?
Tóm tắt
There are distinct differences in strategy amongst experienced surgeons from different ‘scoliosis schools’ around the world. This study aims to test the hypothesis that, due to the 3-D nature of AIS, different strategies can lead to different coronal, axial and sagittal curve correction. Consecutive patients who underwent posterior scoliosis surgery for primary thoracic AIS were compared between three major scoliosis centres (n = 193). Patients were treated according to the local surgical expertise: Two centres perform primarily an axial apical derotation manoeuvre (centre 1: high implant density, convex rod first, centre 2: low implant density, concave rod first), whereas centre 3 performs posteromedial apical translation without active derotation. Pre- and postoperative shape of the main thoracic curve was analyzed using coronal curve angle, apical rotation and sagittal alignment parameters (pelvic incidence and tilt, T1–T12, T4-T12 and T10-L2 regional kyphosis angles, C7 slope and the level of the inflection point). In addition, the proximal junctional angle at follow-up was compared. Pre-operative coronal curve magnitudes were similar between the 3 cohorts and improved 75%, 70% and 59%, from pre- to postoperative, respectively (P < 0.001). The strategy of centres 1 and 2 leads to significantly more apical derotation. Despite similar postoperative T4-T12 kyphosis, the strategy in centre 1 led to more thoracolumbar lordosis and in centre 2 to a higher inflection point as compared to centre 3. Proximal junctional angle was higher in centres 1 and 2 (P < 0.001) at final follow-up. Curve correction by derotation may lead to thoracolumbar lordosis and therefore higher risk for proximal junctional kyphosis. Focus on sagittal plane by posteromedial translation, however, results in more residual coronal and axial deformity.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Weinstein SL, Dolan LA, Cheng JC, Danielsson A, Morcuende JA (2008) Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Lancet 371:1527–1537. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(08)60658-3
de Kleuver M, Lewis SJ, Germscheid NM, Kamper SJ, Alanay A, Berven SH et al (2014) Optimal surgical care for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: an international consensus. Eur Spine J 23:2603–2618. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-014-3356-1
Abelin-Genevois K, Estivalezes E, Briot J, Sevely A, Sales de Gauzy J, Swider P (2015) Spino-pelvic alignment influences disc hydration properties after AIS surgery: a prospective MRI-based study. Eur Spine J 2015(24):1183–1190. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-015-3875-4
Akazawa T, Kotani T, Sakuma T, Minami S, Orita S, Fujimoto K et al (2017) Spinal fusion on adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients with the level of L4 or lower can increase lumbar disc degeneration with sagittal imbalance 35 years after surgery. Spine Surg Relat Res 1:72–77. https://doi.org/10.22603/ssrr.1.2016-0017
Ilharreborde B (2018) Sagittal balance and idiopathic scoliosis: does final sagittal alignment influence outcomes, degeneration rate or failure rate? Eur Spine J 27:48–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-018-5472-9
Mimura T, Ikegami S, Oba H, Uehara M, Koseki M, Takahashi J (2019) Factors leading to postoperative pain in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients including sagittal alignment and lumbar disc degeneration. Eur Spine J 28:3085–3091. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-019-06152-5
Hayashi K, Upasani VV, Pawelek JB, Aubin CE, Labelle H, Lenke LG, et al. (2009) Three-dimensional analysis of thoracic apical sagittal alignment in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 34:792–797. doi: https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e31818e2c36
Mladenov KV, Vaeterlein C, Stuecker R (2011) Selective posterior thoracic fusion by means of direct vertebral derotation in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: effects on the sagittal alignment. Eur Spine J 20:1114–1117. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-011-1740-7
Roaf R (1966) The basic anatomy of scoliosis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 48:786–792
Deacon P, Flood BM, Dickson RA (1984) Idiopathic scoliosis in three dimensions. A radiographic and morphometric analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 66:509–512
Newton PO, Fujimori T, Doan J, Reighard FG, Bastrom TP, Misaghi A (2015) Defining the “Three-Dimensional Sagittal Plane” in Thoracic Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 97:1694–1701. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.O.00148
Schlosser TP, van Stralen M, Chu WC, Lam TP, Ng BK, Vincken KL et al (2016) Anterior overgrowth in primary curves, compensatory curves and junctional segments in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. PLoS ONE 11:e0160267. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0160267
Acaroglu E, Doany M, Cetin E, Castelein R (2019) Correction of rotational deformity and restoration of thoracic kyphosis are inversely related in posterior surgery for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Med Hypotheses 133:109396. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mehy.2019.109396
Schlosser TP, van Stralen M, Brink RC, Chu WC, Lam TP, Vincken KL et al (2014) Three-dimensional characterization of torsion and asymmetry of the intervertebral discs versus vertebral bodies in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 39:E1159–1166. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000000467
Hershkovich O, D'Souza A, Rushton PRP, Onosi IS, Yoon WW, Grevitt MP (2020) Essential lordosis revisited. Bone Joint J. 102-B:513–518. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.102B4.BJJ-2019-1069.R1
Shah SA (2007) Derotation of the spine. Neurosurg Clin N Am 18:339–345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nec.2007.02.003
Abelin-Genevois K, Sassi D, Verdun S, Roussouly P (2018) Sagittal classification in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: original description and therapeutic implications. Eur Spine J 27:2192–2202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-018-5613-1
Pasha S, Hassanzadeh P, Ecker M, Ho V (2019) A hierarchical classification of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: Identifying the distinguishing features in 3D spinal deformities. PLoS ONE 14:e0213406. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0213406