Correlation of Upper Instrumented Vertebrae and Future Cervical Spine Surgery to Patient-reported Outcomes in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Treated With Harrington Rod Instrumentation: A Minimum 40-year Follow-up.
Aron Sulovari, Adan M Omar, Jarren A Section, Noorullah Maqsoodi, Emmanuel N Menga, James O Sanders, Cindy X Wang, Paul T Rubery, Varun Puvanesarajah, Addisu Mesfin
{"title":"Correlation of Upper Instrumented Vertebrae and Future Cervical Spine Surgery to Patient-reported Outcomes in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Treated With Harrington Rod Instrumentation: A Minimum 40-year Follow-up.","authors":"Aron Sulovari, Adan M Omar, Jarren A Section, Noorullah Maqsoodi, Emmanuel N Menga, James O Sanders, Cindy X Wang, Paul T Rubery, Varun Puvanesarajah, Addisu Mesfin","doi":"10.1097/BSD.0000000000001913","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Long-term retrospective observational study.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>Assess the influence of upper instrumented vertebrae (UIV) and future cervical spine surgery on patient-reported outcomes in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis (AIS) treated with Harrington rod fusion.</p><p><strong>Summary of background data: </strong>Harrington rod has been largely replaced by pedicle screw fixation due to many considerations, including complications like pseudoarthrosis and implant failure. UIV and future spine surgery are known factors that affect patient-reported outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We identified 318 AIS patients treated with Harrington rod instrumentation and fusion between 1961 and 1978. Patient questionnaires were completed, observing: NDI, SRS-7, PROMIS physical function (PF), PROMIS depression (D), and PROMIS pain interference (PI). Statistical analysis was used to compare outcome measures based on UIV and future cervical spine surgery.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In patients without cervical spine surgery, those with UIV of T5 and proximal had average NDI (P=0.14) of 10.2±11.2 and SRS-7 (P=0.73) of 22.9±3.4 compared with patients with UIV T6 and distal having NDI and SRS-7 of 14.6±11.6 and 22.8±2.6. Patients without cervical spine surgery with UIV of T5 and proximal had average PROMIS PF (P=0.17) of 45.5±2.8, PROMIS D (P=0.73) of 51.8±2.7, and PROMIS PI (P=0.43) of 53.9±1.9 compared with patients with UIV T6 and distal having PROMIS PF, D, and PI scores of 43.5±2.6, 49±3.2, and 55.6±1.9, respectively. Patients with cervical spine surgery had a mean NDI (P=0.13) of 23±1.4, SRS-7 (P=0.12) of 16, PROMIS PF (P=0.11) of 39.2±2.4, and PROMIS D (P=0.43) of 55.7±2.3 as compared with NDI of 11.9±11.5, SRS-7 of 22.8±3.1, PROMIS PF of 43.5±2.6, and PROMIS D of 49.0 ± 3.2 in patients without cervical spine surgery.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In long-term follow-up of AIS patients who underwent Harrington rod instrumentation, patient-reported outcomes were not associated with UIV or future cervical spine surgery; patients undergoing future cervical spine surgery did report greater pain interference.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level IV.</p>","PeriodicalId":10457,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Spine Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Spine Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0000000000001913","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Study design: Long-term retrospective observational study.
Objective: Assess the influence of upper instrumented vertebrae (UIV) and future cervical spine surgery on patient-reported outcomes in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis (AIS) treated with Harrington rod fusion.
Summary of background data: Harrington rod has been largely replaced by pedicle screw fixation due to many considerations, including complications like pseudoarthrosis and implant failure. UIV and future spine surgery are known factors that affect patient-reported outcomes.
Methods: We identified 318 AIS patients treated with Harrington rod instrumentation and fusion between 1961 and 1978. Patient questionnaires were completed, observing: NDI, SRS-7, PROMIS physical function (PF), PROMIS depression (D), and PROMIS pain interference (PI). Statistical analysis was used to compare outcome measures based on UIV and future cervical spine surgery.
Results: In patients without cervical spine surgery, those with UIV of T5 and proximal had average NDI (P=0.14) of 10.2±11.2 and SRS-7 (P=0.73) of 22.9±3.4 compared with patients with UIV T6 and distal having NDI and SRS-7 of 14.6±11.6 and 22.8±2.6. Patients without cervical spine surgery with UIV of T5 and proximal had average PROMIS PF (P=0.17) of 45.5±2.8, PROMIS D (P=0.73) of 51.8±2.7, and PROMIS PI (P=0.43) of 53.9±1.9 compared with patients with UIV T6 and distal having PROMIS PF, D, and PI scores of 43.5±2.6, 49±3.2, and 55.6±1.9, respectively. Patients with cervical spine surgery had a mean NDI (P=0.13) of 23±1.4, SRS-7 (P=0.12) of 16, PROMIS PF (P=0.11) of 39.2±2.4, and PROMIS D (P=0.43) of 55.7±2.3 as compared with NDI of 11.9±11.5, SRS-7 of 22.8±3.1, PROMIS PF of 43.5±2.6, and PROMIS D of 49.0 ± 3.2 in patients without cervical spine surgery.
Conclusion: In long-term follow-up of AIS patients who underwent Harrington rod instrumentation, patient-reported outcomes were not associated with UIV or future cervical spine surgery; patients undergoing future cervical spine surgery did report greater pain interference.
期刊介绍:
Clinical Spine Surgery is the ideal journal for the busy practicing spine surgeon or trainee, as it is the only journal necessary to keep up to date with new clinical research and surgical techniques. Readers get to watch leaders in the field debate controversial topics in a new controversies section, and gain access to evidence-based reviews of important pathologies in the systematic reviews section. The journal features a surgical technique complete with a video, and a tips and tricks section that allows surgeons to review the important steps prior to a complex procedure.
Clinical Spine Surgery provides readers with primary research studies, specifically level 1, 2 and 3 studies, ensuring that articles that may actually change a surgeon’s practice will be read and published. Each issue includes a brief article that will help a surgeon better understand the business of healthcare, as well as an article that will help a surgeon understand how to interpret increasingly complex research methodology. Clinical Spine Surgery is your single source for up-to-date, evidence-based recommendations for spine care.