Skip to main content
Top
Published in: European Spine Journal 3/2010

01-03-2010 | Original Article

Scoliosis in Duchenne’s muscular dystrophy: a changing trend in surgical management

A historical surgical outcome study comparing sublaminar, hybrid and pedicle screw instrumentation systems

Authors: Ranganathan Arun, S. Srinivas, S. M. H. Mehdian

Published in: European Spine Journal | Issue 3/2010

Login to get access

Abstract

A non-randomised retrospective study to compare the results of surgical correction of scoliosis in Duchenne’s muscular dystrophy (DMD) patients using three different instrumentation systems—Sublaminar instrumentation system (Group A), a hybrid of sublaminar and pedicle screw systems (Group B) and pedicle screw system alone (Group C). Between 1993 and 2003, 43 patients with DMD underwent posterior spinal fusion and instrumentation. Group A (n = 19) had sublaminar instrumentation system, Group B (n = 13) had a hybrid construct and Group C (n = 11) was treated with pedicle system. The mean blood loss in Group A was 4.1 l, 3.2 l in Group B and 2.5 l in Group C. Average operating times in Group A, B and C were 300, 274 and 234 min, respectively. Mean pre-operative, post-operative and final Cobb angle in Group A was 50.05 ± 15.46°, 15.68 ± 11.23° and 21.57 ± 11.63°, Group B was 17.76 ± 8.50°, 3.61 ± 2.53° and 6.69 ± 4.19° and Group C was 25.81 ± 9.94°, 5.45 ± 3.88°, 8.90 ± 5.82°, respectively. Flexibility index or the potential correction calculated from bending radiographs were 60 ± 6.33, 70 ± 4.65 and 67 ± 6.79% for Group A, Group B and Group C respectively. The percentage correction achieved was 72.5 ± 14.5% in Group A, 82 ± 6% in Group B and 82 ± 8% in Group C. The difference between percentage correction achieved and the flexibility index was 12.45 ± 8.22, 12.05 ± 1.3 and 15.00 ± 1.21% in Group A, B and C, respectively The percentage loss of correction in Cobb angles at final follow-up in Group A, B and C was 12.5 ± 3.5, 16.5 ± 1. and 12.5 ± 2.5%, respectively. Complications seen in Group A were three cases of wound infection and two cases of implant failure; Group B had a single case of implant failure and Group C had one patient with wound infection and one case with a partial screw pull out. Early surgery and smaller curve corrections appears to be the current trend in the management of scoliosis in DMD. This has been possible due to early curve detection and surgery thus having the advantage of less post-operative respiratory complications and stay in paediatric intensive care. Also, early surgery avoids development of pelvic deformity and extension of instrumentation to the pelvis thereby reducing blood loss. This trend reflects the advent of newer and safer instrumentation systems, advanced techniques in anaesthesia and cord monitoring. Sublaminar instrumentation system group had increased operating times and blood loss compared to both the hybrid and pedicle screw instrumentation systems due to increased bleeding from epidural vessels and pelvic instrumentation. Overall, the three instrumentation constructs appear to provide and maintain an optimal degree of correction at medium to long term follow up but the advantages of lesser blood loss and surgical time without the need for pelvic fixation seem to swing the verdict in favour of the pedicle screw system.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Kinali M, Messina S, Mercuri E et al (2006) Management of scoliosis in Duchenne muscular dystrophy: a large 10-year retrospective study. Dev Med Child Neurol 48(6):513–518CrossRefPubMed Kinali M, Messina S, Mercuri E et al (2006) Management of scoliosis in Duchenne muscular dystrophy: a large 10-year retrospective study. Dev Med Child Neurol 48(6):513–518CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Chataigner H, Grelet V, Onimus M (1998) Surgery of the spine in Duchenne’s muscular dystrophy. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot 84(3):224–230PubMed Chataigner H, Grelet V, Onimus M (1998) Surgery of the spine in Duchenne’s muscular dystrophy. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot 84(3):224–230PubMed
3.
go back to reference Cervellati S, Bettini N, Moscato M, Gusella A, Dema E, Maresi R (2004) Surgical treatment of spinal deformities in Duchenne muscular dystrophy: a long term follow-up study. Eur Spine J 13(5):441–448CrossRefPubMed Cervellati S, Bettini N, Moscato M, Gusella A, Dema E, Maresi R (2004) Surgical treatment of spinal deformities in Duchenne muscular dystrophy: a long term follow-up study. Eur Spine J 13(5):441–448CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Gayet LE, Duport G, Pries P (1999) Flexible and semi-early vertebral instrumentation in surgical treatment of Duchenne muscular dystrophy scoliosis. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 9(4):223–231CrossRef Gayet LE, Duport G, Pries P (1999) Flexible and semi-early vertebral instrumentation in surgical treatment of Duchenne muscular dystrophy scoliosis. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 9(4):223–231CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Mehta KS, Gibson MJ (2003) The treatment of neuromuscular scoliosis. Curr Orthop 17(4):313–321CrossRef Mehta KS, Gibson MJ (2003) The treatment of neuromuscular scoliosis. Curr Orthop 17(4):313–321CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Rideau Y, Glorion B, Delaubier A, Tarlé O, Bach J (1984) The treatment of scoliosis in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Muscle Nerve 7(4):281–286CrossRefPubMed Rideau Y, Glorion B, Delaubier A, Tarlé O, Bach J (1984) The treatment of scoliosis in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Muscle Nerve 7(4):281–286CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Sussman MD (1984) Advantage of early spinal stabilization and fusion in patients with Duchenne muscular dystrophy. J Pediatr Orthop 4:532–537PubMed Sussman MD (1984) Advantage of early spinal stabilization and fusion in patients with Duchenne muscular dystrophy. J Pediatr Orthop 4:532–537PubMed
8.
go back to reference Forst R, Forst J, Heller KD, Hengstler K (1997) Characteristics in the treatment of scoliosis in muscular diseases. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 135(2):95–105CrossRefPubMed Forst R, Forst J, Heller KD, Hengstler K (1997) Characteristics in the treatment of scoliosis in muscular diseases. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 135(2):95–105CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Hopf C, Forst R, Forst J, Eysel P, Reitter B (1994) Multi-segmental fusion of scoliosis in Duchenne’s muscular dystrophy. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 132(5):377–382CrossRefPubMed Hopf C, Forst R, Forst J, Eysel P, Reitter B (1994) Multi-segmental fusion of scoliosis in Duchenne’s muscular dystrophy. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 132(5):377–382CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Bonnett C, Brown JC, Perry J et al (1975) Evolution of treatment of paralytic scoliosis in Rancho Los Amigos hospital. J Bone Joint Surg Am 57:206–215PubMed Bonnett C, Brown JC, Perry J et al (1975) Evolution of treatment of paralytic scoliosis in Rancho Los Amigos hospital. J Bone Joint Surg Am 57:206–215PubMed
11.
go back to reference Harrington PR (1962) Treatment of scoliosis correction and internal fixation by spine instrumentation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 44:591–634PubMed Harrington PR (1962) Treatment of scoliosis correction and internal fixation by spine instrumentation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 44:591–634PubMed
12.
go back to reference Luque ER (1982) Segmental spinal instrumentation. Clin Orthop Relat Res 163:192–198PubMed Luque ER (1982) Segmental spinal instrumentation. Clin Orthop Relat Res 163:192–198PubMed
13.
go back to reference Mehdian H, Eisenstein S (1989) Segmental spinal instrumentation using short closed wire loops. Clin Orthop Relat Res 247:90–96PubMed Mehdian H, Eisenstein S (1989) Segmental spinal instrumentation using short closed wire loops. Clin Orthop Relat Res 247:90–96PubMed
14.
go back to reference Mehdian H, Shimizu N, Draycott V (1989) Spinal stabilization for scoliosis in Duchenne muscular dystrophy: experience with various sublaminar instrumentation system. Neuro-Orthopedics 7:74–82 Mehdian H, Shimizu N, Draycott V (1989) Spinal stabilization for scoliosis in Duchenne muscular dystrophy: experience with various sublaminar instrumentation system. Neuro-Orthopedics 7:74–82
15.
go back to reference Mubarak SJ, Morin WD, Leach J (1993) Spinal fusion in Duchenne muscular dystrophy: fixation and fusion to the sacropelvis? J Pediatr Orthop 13:752–757PubMed Mubarak SJ, Morin WD, Leach J (1993) Spinal fusion in Duchenne muscular dystrophy: fixation and fusion to the sacropelvis? J Pediatr Orthop 13:752–757PubMed
16.
go back to reference Alman BA, Kim HK (1999) Pelvic obliquity after fusion of the spine in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. J Bone Joint Surg Br 81:821–824CrossRefPubMed Alman BA, Kim HK (1999) Pelvic obliquity after fusion of the spine in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. J Bone Joint Surg Br 81:821–824CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Sengupta DK, Mehdian SH, McConnell JR, Eisenstein SM, Webb JK (2002) Pelvic or lumbar fixation for the surgical management of scoliosis in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Spine 27(18):2072–2079CrossRefPubMed Sengupta DK, Mehdian SH, McConnell JR, Eisenstein SM, Webb JK (2002) Pelvic or lumbar fixation for the surgical management of scoliosis in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Spine 27(18):2072–2079CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Galasko CS, Delaney C, Morris P (1992) Spinal stabilisation in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. J Bone Joint Surg Br 74-B:210–214 Galasko CS, Delaney C, Morris P (1992) Spinal stabilisation in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. J Bone Joint Surg Br 74-B:210–214
19.
go back to reference Galasko CS, Williamson JB, Delaney CM (1995) Lung function in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Eur Spine J 4(5):263–267CrossRefPubMed Galasko CS, Williamson JB, Delaney CM (1995) Lung function in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Eur Spine J 4(5):263–267CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Kennedy JD, Staples AJ, Brook PD et al (1995) Effect of spinal surgery on lung function in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Thorax 50(11):1173–1178CrossRefPubMed Kennedy JD, Staples AJ, Brook PD et al (1995) Effect of spinal surgery on lung function in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Thorax 50(11):1173–1178CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Herndon WA, Sullivan JA, Yngve DA, Gross RH, Dreher G (1987) Segmental spinal instrumentation with sublaminar wires. A critical appraisal. J Bone Joint Surg Am 69:851–859PubMed Herndon WA, Sullivan JA, Yngve DA, Gross RH, Dreher G (1987) Segmental spinal instrumentation with sublaminar wires. A critical appraisal. J Bone Joint Surg Am 69:851–859PubMed
22.
go back to reference Gurr KR, McAfee PC (1988) Cotrel-Dubousset instrumentation in adults. A preliminary report. Spine 13(5):510–520CrossRefPubMed Gurr KR, McAfee PC (1988) Cotrel-Dubousset instrumentation in adults. A preliminary report. Spine 13(5):510–520CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Hitchon PW, Brenton MD, Black AG et al (2003) In vitro biomechanical comparison of pedicle screws, sublaminar hooks, and sublaminar cables. J Neurosurg 99(1 Suppl):104–109PubMed Hitchon PW, Brenton MD, Black AG et al (2003) In vitro biomechanical comparison of pedicle screws, sublaminar hooks, and sublaminar cables. J Neurosurg 99(1 Suppl):104–109PubMed
24.
go back to reference Rosner MK, Polly DW, Kuklo TR, Ondra SL (2003) Thoracic pedicle screw fixation for spinal deformity. Neurosurg Focus 14(1):e7CrossRefPubMed Rosner MK, Polly DW, Kuklo TR, Ondra SL (2003) Thoracic pedicle screw fixation for spinal deformity. Neurosurg Focus 14(1):e7CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Kim YJ, Lenke LG, Kim J et al (2006) Comparative analysis of pedicle screw versus hybrid instrumentation in posterior spinal fusion of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 31(3):291–298CrossRefPubMed Kim YJ, Lenke LG, Kim J et al (2006) Comparative analysis of pedicle screw versus hybrid instrumentation in posterior spinal fusion of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 31(3):291–298CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Suk SI, Kim WJ, Lee SM, Kim JH, Chung ER (2001) Thoracic pedicle screw fixation in spinal deformities: are they really safe? Spine 26(18):2049–2057CrossRefPubMed Suk SI, Kim WJ, Lee SM, Kim JH, Chung ER (2001) Thoracic pedicle screw fixation in spinal deformities: are they really safe? Spine 26(18):2049–2057CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Suk SI, Kim WJ (2004) Biomechanics in posterior spinal instrumentation in biomechanics and biomaterials, Chapter 43. In: Poitout DG (ed) Orthopaedics. Springer, Berlin, pp 462–491 Suk SI, Kim WJ (2004) Biomechanics in posterior spinal instrumentation in biomechanics and biomaterials, Chapter 43. In: Poitout DG (ed) Orthopaedics. Springer, Berlin, pp 462–491
28.
go back to reference Edler A, Murray DJ, Forbes RB (2003) Blood loss during posterior spinal fusion surgery in patients with neuromuscular disease: is there an increased risk? Paediatr Anesth 13(9):818CrossRef Edler A, Murray DJ, Forbes RB (2003) Blood loss during posterior spinal fusion surgery in patients with neuromuscular disease: is there an increased risk? Paediatr Anesth 13(9):818CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Bentley G, Haddad F, Bull TM, Seingry D (2001) The treatment of scoliosis in muscular dystrophy using modified Luque and Harrington-Luque instrumentation. J Bone Joint Surg Br 83-B:22–28CrossRef Bentley G, Haddad F, Bull TM, Seingry D (2001) The treatment of scoliosis in muscular dystrophy using modified Luque and Harrington-Luque instrumentation. J Bone Joint Surg Br 83-B:22–28CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Scoliosis in Duchenne’s muscular dystrophy: a changing trend in surgical management
A historical surgical outcome study comparing sublaminar, hybrid and pedicle screw instrumentation systems
Authors
Ranganathan Arun
S. Srinivas
S. M. H. Mehdian
Publication date
01-03-2010
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
European Spine Journal / Issue 3/2010
Print ISSN: 0940-6719
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0932
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-009-1163-x

Other articles of this Issue 3/2010

European Spine Journal 3/2010 Go to the issue

Open Operating Theatre (OOT)

Posterior surgery congenital scoliosis