Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis is the most common type of scoliosis. High degrees curve can be treated with the anterior, posterior, or combined anterior-posterior approach. Contrarily to the anterior approach, the posterior one is widely used nowadays for its good correction outcomes and relatively low-complication rate. Materials and Methods: We evaluated retrospectively 27 patients, treated with posterior approach. Patients were divided into two groups, namely pedicle screws group (PSG) and hybrid group (pedicle screws + sublaminar bands). Radiographic measurements, including thoracic and lumbar Cobb° measurements of primary and secondary curves, coronal balance and sagittal balance, kyphosis and lordosis, curve flexibility, first and last vertebra included in the arthrodesis, and implant density were evaluated. Clinical patients' satisfaction was also evaluated with Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) 24 questionnaire. Results: Considering both groups, on preoperative X-rays, the average primary scoliotic curve angle was 83.56° ± 10.96° (range 70°-112°), whereas the global flexibility was 64° ± 7.63 (range 46°-72°). The curves were classified following the Lenke classification: 17 Type 1, 2 Type 2, and 8 Type 3. The primary curve resulted to be well corrected in both groups. In T0, the groups were homogeneous, but in T1 and follow-up, PSG stated a better mean value. No other significative differences can be found between groups for all other items (P > 0.05). Clinical results of SRS 24 were excellent in both groups. Conclusions: The posterior approach proved to be an excellent technique for obtaining good clinical and radiographic results if the surgeon adopts the third-generation high-density implants. Level of Evidence: III.
Over 70° thoracic idiopathic scoliosis: Results with screws or hybrid constructs
Rava A.;Fusini F.;Masse A.;Girardo M.
2019-01-01
Abstract
Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis is the most common type of scoliosis. High degrees curve can be treated with the anterior, posterior, or combined anterior-posterior approach. Contrarily to the anterior approach, the posterior one is widely used nowadays for its good correction outcomes and relatively low-complication rate. Materials and Methods: We evaluated retrospectively 27 patients, treated with posterior approach. Patients were divided into two groups, namely pedicle screws group (PSG) and hybrid group (pedicle screws + sublaminar bands). Radiographic measurements, including thoracic and lumbar Cobb° measurements of primary and secondary curves, coronal balance and sagittal balance, kyphosis and lordosis, curve flexibility, first and last vertebra included in the arthrodesis, and implant density were evaluated. Clinical patients' satisfaction was also evaluated with Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) 24 questionnaire. Results: Considering both groups, on preoperative X-rays, the average primary scoliotic curve angle was 83.56° ± 10.96° (range 70°-112°), whereas the global flexibility was 64° ± 7.63 (range 46°-72°). The curves were classified following the Lenke classification: 17 Type 1, 2 Type 2, and 8 Type 3. The primary curve resulted to be well corrected in both groups. In T0, the groups were homogeneous, but in T1 and follow-up, PSG stated a better mean value. No other significative differences can be found between groups for all other items (P > 0.05). Clinical results of SRS 24 were excellent in both groups. Conclusions: The posterior approach proved to be an excellent technique for obtaining good clinical and radiographic results if the surgeon adopts the third-generation high-density implants. Level of Evidence: III.
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
