Skip to main content
Top
Published in: European Spine Journal 10/2016

01-10-2016 | Original Article

The effect of metal density in thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis

Authors: Paul R. P. Rushton, Mahmoud Elmalky, Agnivesh Tikoo, Saumyajit Basu, Ashley A. Cole, Michael P. Grevitt

Published in: European Spine Journal | Issue 10/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

Determine impact of metal density on curve correction and costs in thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). Ascertain if increased metal density is required for larger or stiffer curves.

Methods

Multicentre retrospective case series of patients with Lenke 1-2 AIS treated with single-stage posterior only surgery using a standardized surgical technique; constructs using >80 % screws with variable metal density. All cases had >2-year follow up. Outcomes measures included coronal and sagittal radiographic outcomes, metal density (number of instrumented pedicles vs total available), fusion length and cost.

Results

106 cases included 94 female. 78 Lenke 1. Mean age 14 years (9–26). Mean main thoracic (MT) Cobb angle 63° corrected to 22° (66 %). No significant correlations were present between metal density and: (a) coronal curve correction rates of the MT (r = 0.13, p = 0.19); (b) lumbar curve frontal correction (r = −0.15, p = 0.12); (c) correction index in MT curve (r = −0.10, p = 0.32); and (d) correction index in lumbar curve (r = 0.11, p = 0.28). Metal density was not correlated with change in thoracic kyphosis (r = 0.22, p = 0.04) or lumbosacral lordosis (r = 0.27, p = 0.01). Longer fusions were associated with greater loss of thoracic kyphosis (r = −0.31, p = 0.003). Groups differing by preoperative curve size and stiffness had comparable corrections with similar metal density. The pedicle screw cost represented 21–29 % of overall cost of inpatient treatment depending on metal density.

Conclusions

Metal density affects cost but not the coronal and sagittal correction of thoracic AIS. Neither larger nor stiffer curves necessitate high metal density.
Literature
1.
go back to reference de Kleuver M, Lewis SJ, Germscheid NM et al (2014) Optimal surgical care for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: an international consensus. Eur Spine J 23:2603–2618CrossRefPubMed de Kleuver M, Lewis SJ, Germscheid NM et al (2014) Optimal surgical care for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: an international consensus. Eur Spine J 23:2603–2618CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Martin CT, Pugely AJ, Gao Y et al (2014) Increasing hospital charges for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis in the United States. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 39:1676–1682CrossRef Martin CT, Pugely AJ, Gao Y et al (2014) Increasing hospital charges for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis in the United States. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 39:1676–1682CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Lonner BS, Auerbach JD, Estreicher MB et al (2009) Thoracic pedicle screw instrumentation: the learning curve and evolution in technique in the treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 34:2158–2164CrossRef Lonner BS, Auerbach JD, Estreicher MB et al (2009) Thoracic pedicle screw instrumentation: the learning curve and evolution in technique in the treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 34:2158–2164CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Quan GM, Gibson MJ (2010) Correction of main thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis using pedicle screw instrumentation: does higher implant density improve correction? Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 35:562–567CrossRef Quan GM, Gibson MJ (2010) Correction of main thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis using pedicle screw instrumentation: does higher implant density improve correction? Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 35:562–567CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Roach JW, Mehlman CT, Sanders JO (2011) Does the outcome of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis surgery justify the rising cost of the procedures? J Pediatr Orthop 31:S77–80CrossRefPubMed Roach JW, Mehlman CT, Sanders JO (2011) Does the outcome of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis surgery justify the rising cost of the procedures? J Pediatr Orthop 31:S77–80CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Clements DH, Betz RR, Newton PO et al (2009) Correlation of scoliosis curve correction with the number and type of fixation anchors. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 34:2147–2150CrossRef Clements DH, Betz RR, Newton PO et al (2009) Correlation of scoliosis curve correction with the number and type of fixation anchors. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 34:2147–2150CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Larson AN, Polly DW Jr, Diamond B et al (2014) Does higher anchor density result in increased curve correction and improved clinical outcomes in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis? Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 39:571–578CrossRef Larson AN, Polly DW Jr, Diamond B et al (2014) Does higher anchor density result in increased curve correction and improved clinical outcomes in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis? Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 39:571–578CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Sanders JO, Diab M, Richards SB et al (2011) Fixation points within the main thoracic curve: does more instrumentation produce greater curve correction and improved results? Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 36:E1402–E1406CrossRef Sanders JO, Diab M, Richards SB et al (2011) Fixation points within the main thoracic curve: does more instrumentation produce greater curve correction and improved results? Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 36:E1402–E1406CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Yang S, Jones-Quaidoo SM, Eager M et al (2011) Right adolescent idiopathic thoracic curve (Lenke 1 A and B): does cost of instrumentation and implant density improve radiographic and cosmetic parameters? Eur Spine J 20:1039–1047CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Yang S, Jones-Quaidoo SM, Eager M et al (2011) Right adolescent idiopathic thoracic curve (Lenke 1 A and B): does cost of instrumentation and implant density improve radiographic and cosmetic parameters? Eur Spine J 20:1039–1047CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
go back to reference Bharucha NJ, Lonner BS, Auerbach JD et al (2013) Low-density versus high-density thoracic pedicle screw constructs in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: do more screws lead to a better outcome? Spine J 13:375–381CrossRefPubMed Bharucha NJ, Lonner BS, Auerbach JD et al (2013) Low-density versus high-density thoracic pedicle screw constructs in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: do more screws lead to a better outcome? Spine J 13:375–381CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Li M, Shen Y, Fang X et al (2009) Coronal and sagittal plane correction in patients with Lenke 1 adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a comparison of consecutive versus interval pedicle screw placement. J Spinal Disord Tech 22:251–256CrossRefPubMed Li M, Shen Y, Fang X et al (2009) Coronal and sagittal plane correction in patients with Lenke 1 adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a comparison of consecutive versus interval pedicle screw placement. J Spinal Disord Tech 22:251–256CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Tsirikos AI, Subramanian AS (2012) Posterior spinal arthrodesis for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis using pedicle screw instrumentation: does a bilateral or unilateral screw technique affect surgical outcome? J Bone Joint Surg Br 94:1670–1677CrossRefPubMed Tsirikos AI, Subramanian AS (2012) Posterior spinal arthrodesis for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis using pedicle screw instrumentation: does a bilateral or unilateral screw technique affect surgical outcome? J Bone Joint Surg Br 94:1670–1677CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Clement JL, Chau E, Kimkpe C et al (2008) Restoration of thoracic kyphosis by posterior instrumentation in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: comparative radiographic analysis of two methods of reduction. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 33:1579–1587CrossRef Clement JL, Chau E, Kimkpe C et al (2008) Restoration of thoracic kyphosis by posterior instrumentation in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: comparative radiographic analysis of two methods of reduction. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 33:1579–1587CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Vora V, Crawford A, Babekhir N et al (2007) A pedicle screw construct gives an enhanced posterior correction of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis when compared with other constructs: myth or reality. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 32:1869–1874CrossRef Vora V, Crawford A, Babekhir N et al (2007) A pedicle screw construct gives an enhanced posterior correction of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis when compared with other constructs: myth or reality. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 32:1869–1874CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Fletcher ND, Hopkins J, McClung A et al (2012) Residual thoracic hypokyphosis after posterior spinal fusion and instrumentation in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: risk factors and clinical ramifications. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 37:200–206CrossRef Fletcher ND, Hopkins J, McClung A et al (2012) Residual thoracic hypokyphosis after posterior spinal fusion and instrumentation in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: risk factors and clinical ramifications. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 37:200–206CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Morr S, Carrer A, Alvarez-Garcia de Quesada LI et al (2015) Skipped versus consecutive pedicle screw constructs for correction of Lenke 1 curves. Eur Spine J 24(7):1473–1480CrossRefPubMed Morr S, Carrer A, Alvarez-Garcia de Quesada LI et al (2015) Skipped versus consecutive pedicle screw constructs for correction of Lenke 1 curves. Eur Spine J 24(7):1473–1480CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Lamerain M, Bachy M, Delpont M et al (2014) CoCr rods provide better frontal correction of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis treated by all-pedicle screw fixation. Eur Spine J 23:1190–1196CrossRefPubMed Lamerain M, Bachy M, Delpont M et al (2014) CoCr rods provide better frontal correction of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis treated by all-pedicle screw fixation. Eur Spine J 23:1190–1196CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Aubin CE, Labelle H, Ciolofan OC (2007) Variability of spinal instrumentation configurations in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Eur Spine J 16:57–64CrossRefPubMed Aubin CE, Labelle H, Ciolofan OC (2007) Variability of spinal instrumentation configurations in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Eur Spine J 16:57–64CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Kamerlink JR, Quirno M, Auerbach JD et al (2010) Hospital cost analysis of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis correction surgery in 125 consecutive cases. J Bone Joint Surg Am 92:1097–1104CrossRefPubMed Kamerlink JR, Quirno M, Auerbach JD et al (2010) Hospital cost analysis of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis correction surgery in 125 consecutive cases. J Bone Joint Surg Am 92:1097–1104CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Sun YQ, Samartzis D, Cheung KM et al (2011) The “X-Factor” index: a new parameter for the assessment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis correction. Eur Spine J 20:144–150CrossRefPubMed Sun YQ, Samartzis D, Cheung KM et al (2011) The “X-Factor” index: a new parameter for the assessment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis correction. Eur Spine J 20:144–150CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Tao F, Zhao Y, Wu Y et al (2010) The effect of differing spinal fusion instrumentation on the occurrence of postoperative crankshaft phenomenon in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. J Spinal Disord Tech 23:e75–80CrossRefPubMed Tao F, Zhao Y, Wu Y et al (2010) The effect of differing spinal fusion instrumentation on the occurrence of postoperative crankshaft phenomenon in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. J Spinal Disord Tech 23:e75–80CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Muschik M, Schlenzka D, Robinson PN et al (1999) Dorsal instrumentation for idiopathic adolescent thoracic scoliosis: rod rotation versus translation. Eur Spine J 8:93–99CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Muschik M, Schlenzka D, Robinson PN et al (1999) Dorsal instrumentation for idiopathic adolescent thoracic scoliosis: rod rotation versus translation. Eur Spine J 8:93–99CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
23.
go back to reference Kuklo TR, Potter BK, Polly DW Jr et al (2005) Monaxial versus multiaxial thoracic pedicle screws in the correction of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 30:2113–2120CrossRef Kuklo TR, Potter BK, Polly DW Jr et al (2005) Monaxial versus multiaxial thoracic pedicle screws in the correction of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 30:2113–2120CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Wang X, Aubin CE, Robitaille I et al (2012) Biomechanical comparison of alternative densities of pedicle screws for the treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Eur Spine J 21:1082–1090CrossRefPubMed Wang X, Aubin CE, Robitaille I et al (2012) Biomechanical comparison of alternative densities of pedicle screws for the treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Eur Spine J 21:1082–1090CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Salmingo RA, Tadano S, Fujisaki K et al (2013) Relationship of forces acting on implant rods and degree of scoliosis correction. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 28:122–128CrossRef Salmingo RA, Tadano S, Fujisaki K et al (2013) Relationship of forces acting on implant rods and degree of scoliosis correction. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 28:122–128CrossRef
26.
go back to reference 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 22:345–354CrossRefPubMed 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 22:345–354CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Le Naveaux F, Aubin CE, Larson AN et al (2015) Implant distribution in surgically instrumented Lenke 1 adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: does it affect curve correction? Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 40:462–468CrossRef Le Naveaux F, Aubin CE, Larson AN et al (2015) Implant distribution in surgically instrumented Lenke 1 adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: does it affect curve correction? Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 40:462–468CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Bago J, Perez-Grueso FJ, Les E et al (2009) Minimal important differences of the SRS-22 Patient Questionnaire following surgical treatment of idiopathic scoliosis. Eur Spine J 18:1898–1904CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Bago J, Perez-Grueso FJ, Les E et al (2009) Minimal important differences of the SRS-22 Patient Questionnaire following surgical treatment of idiopathic scoliosis. Eur Spine J 18:1898–1904CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
29.
go back to reference Lonner BS, Lazar-Antman MA, Sponseller PD et al (2012) Multivariate analysis of factors associated with kyphosis maintenance in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 37:1297–1302CrossRef Lonner BS, Lazar-Antman MA, Sponseller PD et al (2012) Multivariate analysis of factors associated with kyphosis maintenance in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 37:1297–1302CrossRef
30.
go back to reference Suk SI, Lee CK, Kim WJ et al (1995) Segmental pedicle screw fixation in the treatment of thoracic idiopathic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 20:1399–1405CrossRef Suk SI, Lee CK, Kim WJ et al (1995) Segmental pedicle screw fixation in the treatment of thoracic idiopathic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 20:1399–1405CrossRef
Metadata
Title
The effect of metal density in thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis
Authors
Paul R. P. Rushton
Mahmoud Elmalky
Agnivesh Tikoo
Saumyajit Basu
Ashley A. Cole
Michael P. Grevitt
Publication date
01-10-2016
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Spine Journal / Issue 10/2016
Print ISSN: 0940-6719
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0932
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-015-4335-x

Other articles of this Issue 10/2016

European Spine Journal 10/2016 Go to the issue