Top

European Spine Journal

Published in:

01-02-2015 | Original Article

Radiographic, clinical, and patients’ assessment of segmental direct vertebral body derotation versus simple rod derotation in main thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a prospective, comparative cohort study

Authors: Xiangyu Tang, Jing Zhao, Yonggang Zhang

Published in: European Spine Journal | Issue 2/2015

Abstract

Purpose

The application of vertebral body derotation (DVBD) is still controversial by now; the purpose of this prospective cohort study was to compare comprehensive outcomes between segmental DVBD and simple rod derotation (SRD) especially in main thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

Methods

36 patients in DVBD group and 45 patients in SRD group were with a 2-year follow-up. Among them, 19 DVBD patients and 16 SRD patients received CT scan examinations.

Results

There were no significant difference between the groups in preoperative main thoracic Cobb, apical vertebral rotation and rib hump. Apical vertebral rotation measured from CT scans was 9.7° ± 2.0° versus 15.3° ± 2.4° (p < 0.001) postoperatively in the DVBD and SRD patients, respectively. At 2-year follow-up, the main thoracic Cobb was 14.2° ± 1.6° versus 14.7° ± 1.7° (p = 0.18), rib hump was 6.4° ± 3.8° versus 6.8° ± 3.1° (p = 0.60) in DVBD group and SRD group. Patients’ assessments of both groups were improved in Spinal Appearance Questionnaire (SAQ) and Scoliosis Research Society-22 Questionnaire (SRS-22), but showed no significant difference at follow-up (p = 0.47 and 0.60).

Conclusion

Although segmental DVBD showed excellent radiographic correction of axial spinal deformity postoperatively, there was no more correction of clinical rib hump or better patients’ assessment than SRD at follow-up in our data.

Harrington PR (1962) Treatment of scoliosis: correction and internal fixation by spine instrumentation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 44-A:591–610PubMed

Cotrel Y, Dubousset J, Guillaumat M (1988) New universal instrumentation in spinal surgery. Clin Orthop Relat Res 227:10–23PubMed

Kuklo TR, Potter BK, Lenke LG (2005) Vertebral rotation and thoracic torsion in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis what is the best radiographic correlate? J Spinal Disord Tech 18(2):139–147PubMedCrossRef

Min K, Sdzuy C, Farshad M (2013) Posterior correction of thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis with pedicle screw instrumentation: results of 48 patients with minimal 10-year follow-up. Eur Spine J 22(2):345–354PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

Lee SM, Suk SI, Chung ER (2004) Direct vertebral rotation: a new technique of three-dimensional deformity correction with segmental pedicle screw fixation in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 29(3):343–349PubMedCrossRef

Hwang SW, Samdani AF, Lonner B et al (2012) Impact of direct vertebral body derotation on rib prominence. Are preoperative factors predictive of changes in rib prominence? Spine 37(2):E86–E89PubMedCrossRef

Hwang SW, Samdani AF, Cahill PJ (2012) The impact of segmental and En bloc derotation maneuvers on scoliosis correction and rib prominence in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. J Neurosurg Spine 16(4):345–350PubMedCrossRef

Mattila M, Jalanko T, Helenius I (2013) En bloc vertebral column derotation provides spinal derotation but no additional effect on thoracic rib hump correction as compared with no derotation in adolescents undergoing surgery for idiopathic scoliosis with total pedicle screw instrumentation. Spine 38(18):1576–1583PubMedCrossRef

Hwang SW, Dubaz OM, Ames R et al (2012) The impact of direct vertebral body derotation on the lumbar prominence in Lenke Type 5C curves. J Neurosurg Spine 17(4):308–313PubMedCrossRef

10.

Sanders JO, Harrast JJ, Kuklo TR et al (2007) The Spinal Appearance Questionnaire: results of reliability, validity, and responsiveness testing in patients with idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 32(24):2719–2722PubMedCrossRef

11.

Li M, Wang CF, Gu SX et al (2009) Adapted simplified Chinese (mainland) version of Scoliosis Research Society-22 Questionnaire. Spine 34(12):1321–1324PubMedCrossRef

12.

Aaro S, Dahlborn M (1981) Estimation of vertebral rotation and the spinal and ribcage deformity in scoliosis by computer tomography. Spine 6:460–467PubMedCrossRef

13.

Di Silvestre M, Lolli F, Bakaloudis G et al (2013) Apical vertebral derotation in the posterior treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: myth or reality? Eur Spine J 22(2):313–323PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

14.

Hwang SW, Samdani AF, Gressot LV et al (2012) Effect of direct vertebral body derotation on the sagittal profile in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Eur Spine J 21(1):31–39PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

15.

Suk SI, Kim JH, Kim SS et al (2008) Thoracoplasty in thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 33(10):1061–1067PubMedCrossRef

16.

Samdani AF, Hwang SW, Miyanji F et al (2012) Direct vertebral body derotation, thoracoplasty, or both. Which is better with respect to inclinometer and Scoliosis Research Society-22 scores. Spine 37(14):E849–E853PubMedCrossRef

17.

Wagner MR, Flores JB, Sanpera I et al (2011) Aortic abutment after direct vertebral rotation. Plowing of pedicle screws. Spine 36(3):243–247PubMedCrossRef

Title: Radiographic, clinical, and patients’ assessment of segmental direct vertebral body derotation versus simple rod derotation in main thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a prospective, comparative cohort study
Authors: Xiangyu Tang
Jing Zhao
Yonggang Zhang
Publication date: 01-02-2015
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: European Spine Journal / Issue 2/2015
Print ISSN: 0940-6719
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0932
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-014-3650-y

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Radiographic, clinical, and patients’ assessment of segmental direct vertebral body derotation versus simple rod derotation in main thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a prospective, comparative cohort study

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 2/2015

Outcomes and their predictors in lumbar spinal stenosis: a 12-year follow-up

Roentgenographic and computed tomographic findings in symptomatic lumbar foraminal stenosis

Do recovery expectations change over time?

Factors relating to curve progression in female patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis treated with a brace

Expert’s comment concerning Grand Rounds case entitled “Bilateral reconstructive costoplasty for Razorback deformity correction in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis” (Eyal Behrbalk, Ofir Uri, Jonathan A. Clamp, Marcus Rickert, Bronek M. Boszczyk)