TY - JOUR
T1 - How low can you go? Implant density in posterior spinal fusion converted from growing constructs for early onset scoliosis
AU - Pediatric Spine Study Group
AU - Compton, Edward
AU - Gupta, Purnendu
AU - Gomez, Jaime A.
AU - Illingworth, Kenneth D.
AU - Skaggs, David L.
AU - Sponseller, Paul D.
AU - Samdani, Amer F.
AU - Hwang, Steven W.
AU - Oetgen, Matthew E.
AU - Schottler, Jennifer
AU - Thompson, George H.
AU - Vitale, Michael G.
AU - Smith, John T.
AU - Andras, Lindsay M.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021, Scoliosis Research Society.
PY - 2021/9
Y1 - 2021/9
N2 - Study design: Retrospective, multicenter comparative. Objectives: Our purpose was to compare early onset scoliosis (EOS) patients treated with ultra-low, low, and high implant density constructs when undergoing conversion to definitive fusion. Summary of background data: Larson et al. demonstrated that implant density (ID) at fusion does not correlate with outcomes in the treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis, but did not address growth-friendly graduates. Methods: EOS patients treated with growth-friendly constructs converted to fusion between 2000 and 2017 were reviewed from a multicenter database. ID was defined as number of pedicle screws, hooks, and sublaminar/bands per level fused. Patients were divided into ultra-low ID (< 1.3), low (≥ 1.3 and < 1.6), and high ID (≥ 1.6). Exclusion criteria: < 2 years follow-up from fusion or inadequate radiographs. Results: A total of 152 patients met inclusion criteria with 39 (26%) patients in the high ID group, 33 (22%) patients in the low ID group, and 80 (52%) in the ultra-low ID group. Groups were similar in operative time (p = 0.61), pre-fusion major curve (p = 0.71), mean number of levels fused (p = 0.58), clinical follow-up (p = 0.30), and radiographic follow-up (p = 0.90). Patients in the low ID group (11.6 ± 1.5 years) were slightly younger at the time of definitive fusion than patients in the ultra-low ID group (12.9 ± 2.2 years) and high ID group (12.5 ± 1.7 years) (p = 0.009). There was significantly more blood loss in the high ID group than the other two groups (high ID: 946.8 ± 606.0 mL vs. low ID: 733.9 ± 434.5 mL and ultra-low ID: 617.4 ± 517.2 mL; p = 0.01), but there was no significant difference with regard to percent of total blood volume lost (high ID: 59.3 ± 48.7% vs. low ID: 54.5 ± 37.5% vs. ultra-low ID: 51.7 ± 54.9%; p = 0.78). There was a difference in initial improvement in major curve between the groups (high ID: 21.6° vs. low ID: 18.0° vs. ultra-low ID: 12.6°; p = 0.01). However, during post-fusion follow-up, correction decreased 7.1° in the high ID group, 2.6 in the low ID group, and 2.8 in the ultra-low ID group (p = 0.19). At final follow-up, major curve correction from pre-fusion was similar between groups (high ID: 14.5° vs. low ID: 15.5° vs. ultra-low ID: 9.7°, p = 0.14). At final follow-up, there was no difference in T1–T12 length gain (p = 0.85), T1–S1 length gain (p = 0.68), coronal balance (p = 0.56), or sagittal balance (p = 0.71). The revision rate was significantly higher in the ultra-low ID group (13.8%; 11/80) versus the high ID group (2/39; 5.1%) and low ID group (0/33; 0%) (p = 0.04). Conclusions: Although an ID < 1.3 in growth-friendly graduates produces similar outcomes with regard to curve correction and spinal length gain as low and high ID, this study suggests that an ID < 1.3 is associated with an increased revision rate. Level of evidence: III.
AB - Study design: Retrospective, multicenter comparative. Objectives: Our purpose was to compare early onset scoliosis (EOS) patients treated with ultra-low, low, and high implant density constructs when undergoing conversion to definitive fusion. Summary of background data: Larson et al. demonstrated that implant density (ID) at fusion does not correlate with outcomes in the treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis, but did not address growth-friendly graduates. Methods: EOS patients treated with growth-friendly constructs converted to fusion between 2000 and 2017 were reviewed from a multicenter database. ID was defined as number of pedicle screws, hooks, and sublaminar/bands per level fused. Patients were divided into ultra-low ID (< 1.3), low (≥ 1.3 and < 1.6), and high ID (≥ 1.6). Exclusion criteria: < 2 years follow-up from fusion or inadequate radiographs. Results: A total of 152 patients met inclusion criteria with 39 (26%) patients in the high ID group, 33 (22%) patients in the low ID group, and 80 (52%) in the ultra-low ID group. Groups were similar in operative time (p = 0.61), pre-fusion major curve (p = 0.71), mean number of levels fused (p = 0.58), clinical follow-up (p = 0.30), and radiographic follow-up (p = 0.90). Patients in the low ID group (11.6 ± 1.5 years) were slightly younger at the time of definitive fusion than patients in the ultra-low ID group (12.9 ± 2.2 years) and high ID group (12.5 ± 1.7 years) (p = 0.009). There was significantly more blood loss in the high ID group than the other two groups (high ID: 946.8 ± 606.0 mL vs. low ID: 733.9 ± 434.5 mL and ultra-low ID: 617.4 ± 517.2 mL; p = 0.01), but there was no significant difference with regard to percent of total blood volume lost (high ID: 59.3 ± 48.7% vs. low ID: 54.5 ± 37.5% vs. ultra-low ID: 51.7 ± 54.9%; p = 0.78). There was a difference in initial improvement in major curve between the groups (high ID: 21.6° vs. low ID: 18.0° vs. ultra-low ID: 12.6°; p = 0.01). However, during post-fusion follow-up, correction decreased 7.1° in the high ID group, 2.6 in the low ID group, and 2.8 in the ultra-low ID group (p = 0.19). At final follow-up, major curve correction from pre-fusion was similar between groups (high ID: 14.5° vs. low ID: 15.5° vs. ultra-low ID: 9.7°, p = 0.14). At final follow-up, there was no difference in T1–T12 length gain (p = 0.85), T1–S1 length gain (p = 0.68), coronal balance (p = 0.56), or sagittal balance (p = 0.71). The revision rate was significantly higher in the ultra-low ID group (13.8%; 11/80) versus the high ID group (2/39; 5.1%) and low ID group (0/33; 0%) (p = 0.04). Conclusions: Although an ID < 1.3 in growth-friendly graduates produces similar outcomes with regard to curve correction and spinal length gain as low and high ID, this study suggests that an ID < 1.3 is associated with an increased revision rate. Level of evidence: III.
KW - Early onset scoliosis
KW - Growing rod conversion
KW - Implant complication
KW - Implant density
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85109702853&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85109702853&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s43390-021-00321-7
DO - 10.1007/s43390-021-00321-7
M3 - Article
C2 - 34228310
AN - SCOPUS:85109702853
SN - 2212-134X
VL - 9
SP - 1479
EP - 1488
JO - Spine deformity
JF - Spine deformity
IS - 5
ER -