Role of rod diameter in comparison between only screws versus hooks and screws in posterior instrumentation of thoracic curve in idiopathic scoliosis

Since the introduction of Cotrel–Dubousset instrumentation in 1984, the correction techniques in scoliosis surgery have changed from Harrington principles of concave distraction to segmental realignment to a variety of possibilities including the rod rotation manoeuvres, and to segmental approximation via cantilever methods. Additionally, pedicle screw utilization in lumbar curves enhanced correction and stabilization of various deformities, and various studies have strongly supported the clinical advantages of lumbar pedicle screws versus conventional hook instrumentation. Pedicle screw constructs have become increasingly popular in the treatment of patients with spinal deformity. When applied to adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients, pedicle screw fixation has demonstrated increased corrective ability compared with traditional hook/hybrid instrumentation. In our study, we do a retrospective review of idiopathic scoliosis patients (King 2–Lenke 1 B/C) treated with a selective thoracic posterior fusion using an all-screw construct versus a hybrid (pedicle screws and hooks) construct and, compare the percentage of correction of the scoliotic curves obtained with screws alone and screws and hooks. Special attention was given to the rod diameter and correction technique. Our results show that the percentage of correction of idiopathic thoracic scoliosis is similar when treating the scoliosis with rods and screws alone or with rods, screws and hooks; therefore, we and the majority of authors in the literature do not consider the rod section. This can be an important parameter in the evaluation of the superiority of treatment with screws only or screws and hooks. In our study, even if not of statistical significance, the better thoracic curve correction obtained with the hybrid group should be ascribed to the fact that in this group mostly 6 mm rods were used.