Matched comparison of non-fusion surgeries for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: posterior dynamic distraction device and vertebral body tethering.

IF 1.6 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Julia Todderud, A Noelle Larson, Geoffrey Haft, Ron El-Hawary, Nigel Price, John T Anderson, Ryan Fitzgerald, Gilbert Chan, Baron Lonner, Michael Albert, Daniel Hoernschemeyer, Todd A Milbrandt
{"title":"Matched comparison of non-fusion surgeries for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: posterior dynamic distraction device and vertebral body tethering.","authors":"Julia Todderud, A Noelle Larson, Geoffrey Haft, Ron El-Hawary, Nigel Price, John T Anderson, Ryan Fitzgerald, Gilbert Chan, Baron Lonner, Michael Albert, Daniel Hoernschemeyer, Todd A Milbrandt","doi":"10.1007/s43390-024-00982-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Two non-fusion devices for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) received HDE approval for clinical use in 2019: posterior dynamic distraction device (PDDD) and vertebral body tethering system (VBT). Although indications are similar, there is no comparative study of these devices. We hypothesize that curve correction will be comparable, but PDDD will have better perioperative metrics.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>AIS PDDD patients were prospectively enrolled in this matched multicenter study. Inclusion criteria were Lenke 1 or 5 curves, preoperative curves 35°-60°, correction to ≤30° on bending radiographs, and kyphosis <55°. Patients were matched by age, sex, Risser, curve type and curve magnitude to a single-center cohort of VBT patients. Results were compared at 2 years.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>20 PDDD patients were matched to 20 VBT patients. Blood loss was higher in the VBT cohort (88 vs. 36 ml, p < 0.001). Operative time and postoperative length of stay were longer in the VBT cohort, 177 vs. 115 min (p < 0.001) (2.9 vs. 1.2 days, p < 0.001). Postoperative curve measurement and correction at 6 months were better in the PDDD cohort (15° vs. 24°, p < 0.001; 68% vs. 50%, p < 0.001). At 1-year, PDDD patients had improved Cobb angles (14° vs. 21°, p = 0.001). At 2 years, a correction was improved in the PDDD cohort, with a curve measurement of 17° for PDDD and 22° for VBT (p = 0.043). At the latest follow-up, 3 PDDD patients and 1 VBT patient underwent revision surgery.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Early results show PDDD demonstrates better index correction, reduced operative time, less blood loss, and shorter length of stay but higher rates of revision compared to a matched cohort of VBT patients at two-year follow-up.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level II, prospective cohort matched comparative study.</p>","PeriodicalId":21796,"journal":{"name":"Spine deformity","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Spine deformity","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-024-00982-0","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Two non-fusion devices for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) received HDE approval for clinical use in 2019: posterior dynamic distraction device (PDDD) and vertebral body tethering system (VBT). Although indications are similar, there is no comparative study of these devices. We hypothesize that curve correction will be comparable, but PDDD will have better perioperative metrics.

Methods: AIS PDDD patients were prospectively enrolled in this matched multicenter study. Inclusion criteria were Lenke 1 or 5 curves, preoperative curves 35°-60°, correction to ≤30° on bending radiographs, and kyphosis <55°. Patients were matched by age, sex, Risser, curve type and curve magnitude to a single-center cohort of VBT patients. Results were compared at 2 years.

Results: 20 PDDD patients were matched to 20 VBT patients. Blood loss was higher in the VBT cohort (88 vs. 36 ml, p < 0.001). Operative time and postoperative length of stay were longer in the VBT cohort, 177 vs. 115 min (p < 0.001) (2.9 vs. 1.2 days, p < 0.001). Postoperative curve measurement and correction at 6 months were better in the PDDD cohort (15° vs. 24°, p < 0.001; 68% vs. 50%, p < 0.001). At 1-year, PDDD patients had improved Cobb angles (14° vs. 21°, p = 0.001). At 2 years, a correction was improved in the PDDD cohort, with a curve measurement of 17° for PDDD and 22° for VBT (p = 0.043). At the latest follow-up, 3 PDDD patients and 1 VBT patient underwent revision surgery.

Conclusion: Early results show PDDD demonstrates better index correction, reduced operative time, less blood loss, and shorter length of stay but higher rates of revision compared to a matched cohort of VBT patients at two-year follow-up.

Level of evidence: Level II, prospective cohort matched comparative study.

青少年特发性脊柱侧凸非融合手术的匹配比较:后方动态牵引装置和椎体系绳术。
目的:2019 年,两种用于青少年特发性脊柱侧凸(AIS)的非融合器械获得了 HDE 批准,可用于临床:后路动态牵引器械(PDDD)和椎体系带系统(VBT)。虽然适应症相似,但目前还没有对这些装置进行比较研究。我们假设曲线矫正效果相当,但 PDDD 的围手术期指标更好:方法:在这项匹配的多中心研究中,前瞻性地纳入了 AIS PDDD 患者。纳入标准为 Lenke 1 或 5 型曲线,术前曲线 35°-60°,弯曲位片矫正≤30°,脊柱后凸 结果:20 名 PDDD 患者与 20 名 VBT 患者进行了配对。VBT 患者的失血量更高(88 毫升对 36 毫升,P 结论:PDDD 患者的失血量更高,VBT 患者的失血量更少:早期结果显示,与匹配的 VBT 患者队列相比,PDDD 的指数矫正效果更好、手术时间更短、失血量更少、住院时间更短,但两年随访后的翻修率更高:二级,前瞻性队列匹配比较研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
18.80%
发文量
167
期刊介绍: Spine Deformity the official journal of the?Scoliosis Research Society is a peer-refereed publication to disseminate knowledge on basic science and clinical research into the?etiology?biomechanics?treatment?methods and outcomes of all types of?spinal deformities. The international members of the Editorial Board provide a worldwide perspective for the journal's area of interest.The?journal?will enhance the mission of the Society which is to foster the optimal care of all patients with?spine?deformities worldwide. Articles published in?Spine Deformity?are Medline indexed in PubMed.? The journal publishes original articles in the form of clinical and basic research. Spine Deformity will only publish studies that have institutional review board (IRB) or similar ethics committee approval for human and animal studies and have strictly observed these guidelines. The minimum follow-up period for follow-up clinical studies is 24 months.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信