scholarly journals The effect of the adolescent growth spurt on early posterior spinal fusion in infantile and juvenile idiopathic scoliosis

1983 ◽  
Vol 65-B (3) ◽  
pp. 247-254 ◽  
Author(s):  
FL Hefti ◽  
MJ McMaster
2018 ◽  
Vol 108 (1) ◽  
pp. 83-89 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Oksanen ◽  
M. Lastikka ◽  
L. Helenius ◽  
O. Pajulo ◽  
I. Helenius

Background and Aims: To compare outcomes between posterior spinal fusion of juvenile idiopathic scoliosis and adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients with a minimum of 2-year follow-up. The juvenile idiopathic scoliosis patients were fused to the stable vertebra and adolescent idiopathic scoliosis to the touched vertebra. We hypothesized that extending the spinal fusion to the stable vertebra in juvenile patients would provide similar outcomes compared with fusion to the touched vertebra in adolescents. Materials and Methods: A prospective comparative study of 21 consecutive children with juvenile (Risser 0) and 84 adolescent (Risser ⩾2) idiopathic scoliosis (1:4 ratio) undergoing bilateral segmental pedicle screw instrumentation and direct vertebral derotation with a minimum of 2-year follow-up. Results: Juvenile patients had a significantly larger main curve (58° vs 53°, p = 0.003), more fused levels (p = 0.012) and posterior column osteotomies (p = 0.014) than adolescent patients. Distal adding-on (>10°) was observed in one (4.7%) juvenile and three (3.6%) adolescent patients (p = 0.80), without the need for revisions. Scoliosis Research Society 24 total score averaged 101 in juvenile and 97 in adolescent group at 2-year follow-up (p = 0.047). Conclusion: Posterior spinal fusion with bilateral segmental pedicle screw instrumentation to the stable vertebra provides similar clinical and radiographic outcomes in juvenile patients as compared with adolescents with fusion to the touched vertebra in idiopathic scoliosis. Health-related quality of life as measured using the Scoliosis Research Society 24 questionnaire at the end of follow-up was better in the juvenile as compared with the adolescent group.


2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (7) ◽  
pp. e629-e633
Author(s):  
Andrew B. Harris ◽  
Majd Marrache ◽  
Varun Puvanesarajah ◽  
Micheal Raad ◽  
Richard L. Skolasky ◽  
...  

Spine ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 42 (8) ◽  
pp. 603-609 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kazunori Hayashi ◽  
Hidetomi Terai ◽  
Hiromitsu Toyoda ◽  
Akinobu Suzuki ◽  
Masatoshi Hoshino ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris Yuk Kwan Tang ◽  
Vijay H. D. Kamath ◽  
Prudence Wing Hang Cheung ◽  
Jason Pui Yin Cheung

Abstract Background Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is a common spinal deformity. Posterior spinal fusion remains an important surgical treatment for AIS. This study aims to determine the predictive factors for intraoperative blood loss in AIS surgery. Methods Patients who had undergone posterior spinal fusion for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis in a single university hospital were reviewed over a 7-year period. Predictive factors for intra-operative blood loss were studied by multivariate analysis to derive a regression model. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to determine the cut-off values of factors contributing to significant intraoperative blood loss (≥500 ml). Results Two hundred and twelve patients were included. Intraoperative blood loss was found to be correlated with gender (rs = 0.30 (0.17–0.43)), preoperative hemoglobin level (rs = 0.20 (0.04–0.31)), preoperative Cobb angle (rs = 0.20 (0.02–0.29)), number of fused levels (rs = 0.46 (0.34–0.58)), operation duration (rs = 0.65 (0.54–0.75)), number of anchors (rs = 0.47 (0.35–0.59)), and p-value ranged from < 0.001 to < 0.05. Significant intraoperative blood loss was influenced by the male gender, operation duration greater than 257.5 min and more than 10 anchors used. Conclusions Male gender, increased operation duration and higher number of anchors predicted higher intra-operative blood loss.


Author(s):  
Aladine A. Elsamadicy ◽  
Isaac G. Freedman ◽  
Andrew B. Koo ◽  
Wyatt B. David ◽  
John Havlik ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 137-140 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lawrence L. Haber ◽  
Erika D. Womack ◽  
Madhankumar Sathyamoorthy ◽  
James A. Moss ◽  
Michael Wade Shrader

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document