226. The high vs limited screw density group in posterior fusions for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: use of the Spine Tango registry to supplement the evidence from randomized control trials

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (9) ◽  
pp. S111
Author(s):  
Xie En
2012 ◽  
Vol 12 (9) ◽  
pp. S129 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Noelle Larson ◽  
David W. Polly ◽  
Beverly E. Diamond ◽  
T. Ledonio Charles Gerald ◽  
Daniel J. Sucato ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-21
Author(s):  
Enguer Beraldo Garcia ◽  
Liliane Faria Garcia ◽  
Enguer Beraldo Garcia Jr ◽  
Roberto Garcia Gonçalves ◽  
Saulo Terror Giesbrecht ◽  
...  

ABSTRACT Objective: The objective was to investigate implant density or the number of screws correlated with the correction of the main curve in patients undergoing surgery for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). Methods: We evaluated 112 medical records: 33 patients with screw density of up to 50%, and 79 patients with a density of 100%; all patients underwent surgical correction by posterior approach with transpedicular fixation. Results: In the group of patients with screw density of up to 50% the residual Cobb median was 10°; in the group with 100% density, the median was 7°. Conclusion: Biostatistical analysis showed that the group with up to 50% of screw density presented correction rate of 82.1% and the group with 100% density had correction of about 86.8%. It is therefore concluded that the difference is statistically significant in favor of the fixation with 100% density (p =0.010).


2016 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 116-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Noelle Larson ◽  
David W. Polly ◽  
Stacey J. Ackerman ◽  
Charles G. T. Ledonio ◽  
Baron S. Lonner ◽  
...  

OBJECT There is substantial heterogeneity in the number of screws used per level fused in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) surgery. Assuming equivalent clinical outcomes, the potential cost savings of using fewer pedicle screws were estimated using a medical decision model with sensitivity analysis. METHODS Descriptive analyses explored the annual costs for 5710 AIS inpatient stays using discharge data from the 2009 Kids’ Inpatient Database (Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality), which is a national all-payer inpatient database. Patients between 10 and 17 years of age were identified using the ICD-9-CM code for idiopathic scoliosis (737.30). All inpatient stays were assumed to represent 10-level fusions with pedicle screws for AIS. High screw density was defined at 1.8 screws per level fused, and the standard screw density was defined as 1.48 screws per level fused. The surgical return for screw malposition was set at $23,762. A sensitivity analysis was performed by varying the cost per screw ($600–$1000) and the rate of surgical revisions for screw malposition (0.117%–0.483% of screws; 0.8%–4.3% of patients). The reported outcomes include estimated prevented malpositioned screws (set at 5.1%), averted revision surgeries, and annual cost savings in 2009 US dollars, assuming similar clinical outcomes (rates of complications, revision) using a standard- versus high-density pattern. RESULTS The total annual costs for 5710 AIS hospital stays was $278 million ($48,900 per patient). Substituting a high for a standard screw density yields 3.2 fewer screws implanted per patient, with 932 malpositioned screws prevented and 21 to 88 revision surgeries for implant malposition averted, and a potential annual cost savings of $11 million to $20 million (4%–7% reduction in the total cost of AIS hospitalizations). CONCLUSIONS Reducing the number of screws used in scoliosis surgery could potentially decrease national AIS hospitalization costs by up to 7%, which may improve the safety and efficiency of care. However, such a screw construct must first be proven safe and effective.


2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-39 ◽  
Author(s):  
John W. Kemppainen ◽  
Melanie A. Morscher ◽  
M. David Gothard ◽  
Mark J. Adamczyk ◽  
Todd F. Ritzman

PLoS ONE ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 11 (8) ◽  
pp. e0161906 ◽  
Author(s):  
Terufumi Kokabu ◽  
Hideki Sudo ◽  
Yuichiro Abe ◽  
Manabu Ito ◽  
Yoichi M. Ito ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document