Faculty Bibliography

STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:Single-center retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE:To compare the correction of fractional curve and L5 tilt in 2RVBT versus PSF with LIV in the lumbar spine. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA/BACKGROUND:Vertebral body tethering, an AIS fusion-alternative, avoids rigid constructs, allowing for lower instrumented vertebra (LIV) selection. Single-tether constructs break, but mini-open thoracoscopic assistant double-row vertebral body tethering (2RVBT) reduces this. Limited comparative studies exist with posterior spinal fusion (PSF). METHODS:Retrospective analysis of AIS correction surgeries with lumbar LIV using preoperative and minimum 2-year postoperative imaging. Patients were divided into 2RVBT or PSF groups. Data included age, Riser, UIV, LIV, instrumented levels, and revision rates. Radiographic analyses included preoperative and postoperative main curve Cobb (MCC), secondary curve Cobb (SCC), fractional curve Cobb (FCC), and L5 tilt. RESULTS:Ninety-nine patients participated (49 in 2RVBT, 50 in PSF). Preoperatively, secondary CC differed significantly (2RVBT: 44.6±10.4 degrees vs. PSF: 39.5±11.8 degrees, P=0.026), but not L5 tilt, MCC, or FCC. Postoperatively, MCC (2RVBT: 25.7±12.3 degrees vs. PSF: 19.5±7.4 degrees, P=0.003) and SCC (2RVBT: 18.0±8.4 degrees vs. PSF: 14.5±6.6 degrees, P=0.012) varied. Preoperative to postoperative changes in MCC (2RVBT: -32.0±11.3 degrees vs. PSF: -37.2±13.3 degrees, P=0.044) and L5 tilt (-13.8±9.0 degrees vs. PSF: -8.1±6.8 degrees, P=0.001) differed. Revision rates were similar (2RVBT: 2.0%, PSF: 4.0%, P=0.57). In 2RVBT, 3 tethers broke, 1 revision occurred for a broken tether, and 1 pleural effusion needed thoracocentesis. In PSF, 1 superficial infection needed surgery, and 1 revision was for add-on phenomenon. After PSM for Lenke classification, 54 patients remained (27 in each group). At 2 years, 2RVBT showed less MCC correction (-30.8±11.8 degrees vs. -38.9±11.9 degrees, P=0.017), but greater L5 tilt correction (-14.6±10.0 degrees vs. -7.5±6.0 degrees, P=0.003). CONCLUSIONS:This study with a minimum 2-year radiographic follow-up demonstrates that 2RVBT results in greater L5 tilt correction when compared with posterior spinal fusion after PSM for Lenke classification and similar rates of revision surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Level III.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:The current gold standard of scoliosis correction procedures is still posterior spinal fusion, an extensively studied procedure. anterior vertebral body tethering is a newer surgical technique for the correction of scoliotic curves. Consequently, best practices have yet to be determined. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:A single-institution, retrospective, review of all patients diagnosed with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis who underwent two row anterior vertebral body tethering between June 2020 and April 2022 was performed. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED: = 4). CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:This early review of a 2-year two row vertebral body tethering postoperative experience provides a report of a safe and effective approach to chest tube management at a single academic center.

OBJECTIVE:The 24-item Early-Onset Scoliosis Questionnaire (EOSQ-24) is validated in patients with early onset scoliosis (EOS) aged 0 to 18 years and the 22-item Scoliosis Research Society (SRS-22) questionnaire is validated in idiopathic scoliosis patients 10 years and older. EOSQ-24 is completed by the caregiver and SRS-22 is completed by the patient. A prior study comparing patient-reported outcome measures completed by older pediatric patients and their parents showed a low level of agreement. Our purpose was to compare EOSQ-24 and SRS-22 scores completed at the same time point and at subsequent time points, in patients aged 5 to 18 years with idiopathic or congenital EOS without developmental delay. METHODS:This was a multicenter retrospective study. We identified pairs of EOSQ-24 and SRS-22 completed on the same day or within 6 months. Some patients had multiple pairs of surveys over time. EOSQ-24 and SRS-22 questions were matched and domain scores for Pain, Function, Mental Health, and Satisfaction were compared. Patients with a change in treatment between surveys were excluded. Pearson correlation coefficients ( r ) were used to compare domain scores, with r ≥0.7 indicating a strong relationship. RESULTS:There were 228 patient-caregiver dyads who completed 411 pairs of EOSQ-24 and SRS-22 on the same day. A strong correlation was found only for the Pain domain ( r =0.77). Function, Mental Health, and Satisfaction domains had positive but not strong correlations ( r = 0.58, r = 0.50, r = 0.41, respectively). Subanalysis based on age also showed a strong correlation only for Pain. There were 76 patient-caregiver dyads who completed 134 pairs of surveys with SRS-22 completed within 6 months after an EOSQ-24. All domains demonstrated a positive but not strong correlation, with Pain showing the highest correlation ( r = 0.64). CONCLUSIONS:EOSQ-24 and SRS-22 had a strong correlation only for Pain when completed at the same time point. EOSQ-24 and SRS-22 completed within 6 months lacked a strong correlation for all domains. Our findings suggest that parents and children with EOS may not share the same perspective on their health. Self-reported questionnaires should be used when possible to assess health-related quality of life in older children and adolescents with EOS who are developmentally neurotypical. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Level III-diagnostic.

OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this study was to identify factors associated with fusion success among pediatric patients undergoing occiput-C2 rigid instrumentation and fusion. METHODS:The Pediatric Spine Study Group registry was queried to identify patients ≤ 21 years of age who underwent occiput-C2 posterior spinal rigid instrumentation and fusion and had a 2-year minimum clinical and radiographic (postoperative lateral cervical radiograph or CT scan) follow-up. Fusion failure was defined clinically if a patient underwent hardware revision surgery > 30 days after the index procedure or radiographically by the presence of hardware failure or screw haloing on the most recent follow-up imaging study. Univariate comparisons and multivariable logistic regression analyses were subsequently performed. RESULTS:Seventy-six patients met inclusion criteria. The median age at surgery was 9 years (range 1.5-17.2 years), and 51% of the cohort was male. Overall, 75% of patients had syndromic (n = 41) or congenital (n = 15) etiologies, with the most frequent diagnoses of Down syndrome (28%), Chiari malformation (13%), and Klippel-Feil syndrome (12%). Data were available to determine if there was a fusion failure in 97% (74/76) of patients. Overall, 38% (28/74) of patients had fusion failure (95% CI 27%-50%). Univariate analysis demonstrated that use of a rigid cervical collar postoperatively (p = 0.04) and structural rib autograft (p = 0.02) were associated with successful fusion. Multivariable logistic regression analysis determined that patients who had rib autograft used in surgery had a 73% decrease in the odds of fusion failure (OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.09-0.82; p = 0.02). Age, etiology including Down syndrome, instrumentation type, unilateral instrumentation, use of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein, and other variables did not influence the risk for fusion failure. CONCLUSIONS:In this multicenter, multidisciplinary, international registry of children undergoing occiput-C2 instrumentation and fusion, fusion failure was seen in 38% of patients, a higher rate than previously reported in the literature. The authors' data suggest that postoperative immobilization in a rigid cervical collar may be beneficial, and the use of structural rib autograft should be considered, as rib autograft was associated with a 75% higher chance of successful fusion.

Pediatric spine trauma is rare but presents unique challenges to clinical management. Special considerations include but are not limited to the need to minimize ionizing radiation in this patient population, anatomic immaturity, physiologic variants, and injuries seen only in the pediatric population. Here we review the epidemiology of pediatric spine trauma, presentation, diagnosis, and treatment of the most common injuries and discuss specific medical and surgical strategies for treatment.

Pediatric spine trauma is rare but presents unique challenges to clinical management. Special considerations include but are not limited to the need to minimize ionizing radiation in this patient population, anatomic immaturity, physiologic variants, and injuries seen only in the pediatric population. Here we review the epidemiology of pediatric spine trauma, presentation, diagnosis, and treatment of the most common injuries and discuss specific medical and surgical strategies for treatment.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: VBT takes advantage of the Hueter-Volkmann principle, and modulates growth across intervertebral disc spaces with a tensioned tether secured at the lateral aspects of vertebral bodies. Cervical deformity in AIS patients is associated with lower health related quality of life. PSF constructs have been shown to improve cervical deformity, however, to date, these relationships have not been described in patients treated with VBT. PURPOSE: Determine if cervical sagittal alignment parameters following VBT for correction of AIS are similar to what is observed following PSF. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Multi-center retrospective cohort study. PATIENT SAMPLE: Patients with AIS that undergo correction surgeries with LIV in the lumbar spine from 2013 to 2021 with pre- and 2-year postop standing full body plain films available. OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcome measures: Age, height, weight, BMI, Risser score, LIV and levels instrumented. Radiographic analysis included pre- and postop C2 to C7 sagittal vertical axis (cSVA), cervical lordosis angle (CL), T1 slope and thoracic kyphosis (TK).
METHOD(S): Measures were compared using independent samples t-tests, significance set at p<0.05.
RESULT(S): A total of 99 patients: 49 VBT and 50 fusions. The VBT cohort Lenke class breakdown is 23% 1A, 13% 1C, 31% 3C; 18% 5C, and 15% 6C, while the PSF cohort consisted of 42% 1A, 6% 1B, 2% 2C, 2% 3B, 12% 3C, 2% 5B, 24% 5C, and 10% 6C. There were no significant differences with regard to patient age or number of levels instrumented. Patients included in the VBT cohort had a lower level of bone maturity as defined by Risser class (1.6+/-0.9 vs 2.6+/-1.8, p=0.001). The VBT cohort had higher baseline cSVA (3.4mm+/-1.6 vs -1.0mm+/-3.1, 0.001) and less CL (-0.6degree+/-18.2 vs 11.6degree+/-12.8, p=0.001) than the fusion cohort. No differences in baseline T1 slope or Thoracic Kyphosis was observed. VBT patients also had higher 2-year cSVA (3.4mm+/-1.4 vs -3.7mm+/-2.1, p=0.001) and less CL (-4.0+/-18.5 vs 7.0+/-12.2, p=0.001) compared to fusion patients. The PSF group had a significantly greater correction in cSVA than the VBT group (2.8mm+/-4.0 vs 0mm+/-1.6, p=0.001). Both groups displayed improvement in radiographic parameters of cervical and thoracic alignment including CL (VBT 3.3degreevs 4.3degree, p=0.74), T1 slope (VBT -4.3degreevs -4.9degree, p=0.81) and TK (VBT -6.1degreevs -3.9degree, p=0.47). After PSM for Lenke classification, 66 patients remained: 33 VBT, 33 PSF. The PSF group continued to demonstrate greater improvement in cSVA than the VBT group (3.2mm+/-3.0 vs -0.3+/-1.8, p=0.001.
CONCLUSION(S): VBT and PSF both improve radiographic parameters of cervical alignment in AIS patients; however, PSF showed greater correction of cSVA at 2-year followup. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Sagittal alignment is integral to a patient's quality of life. Posterior spinal fusion (PSF) is currently the standard for correcting adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). Vertebral body tethering (VBT) is a fusionless growth modulating surgical technique used to treat AIS. It relies on the Hueter-Volkmann Law. Indications for this procedure include patients who have coronal curves up to 50degree, growth remaining, and no excessive thoracic kyphosis. VBT has been shown to have good coronal plane deformity correction. There have been fewer examinations of the sagittal effects of VBT. PURPOSE: To determine if VBT is a non-inferior treatment for correction of AIS with regard to sagittal alignment compared to PSF. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Multicenter retrospective cohort study. PATIENT SAMPLE: Patients with AIS who underwent correction surgeries with LIV in the lumbar spine from 2013 to 2021 with pre- and minimum two-year postoperative standing full spine plain films. OUTCOME MEASURES: Sagittal vertical axis (SVA), cervical SVA (cSVA), pelvic tilt (PT), thoracic kyphosis (TK), cervical lordosis (CL), L4-S1 lordosis (L4L), T1 pelvic angle (TPA) and pelvic incidence lumbar lordosis mismatch (PI-LL).
METHOD(S): Radiographic analyses was completed with independent samples t-test with significance set to p <0.05.
RESULT(S): A total of 99 patients were included, 49 VBT and 50 PSF. There were no differences in age or levels instrumented between groups. The VBT cohort Lenke class breakdown is 23% 1A, 13% 1C, 31% 3C. 18% 5C, and 15% 6C, while the PSF cohort consisted of 42% 1A, 6% 1B, 2% 2C, 2% 3B, 12% 3C, 2% 5B, 24% 5C, and 10% 6C. At Baseline, the VBT cohort had lower SVA (-0.7mm+/-3.7 vs 2.2mm+/-5.0, p=0.001), CL (-0.9degree+/-18.2 vs 11.6degree+/-12.8, p=0.001), L4-S1 Lordosis (20.7degree+/-16.0 vs 41.6degree+/-10.2, p=0.001), and higher cSVA (3.3mm+/-1.6 vs -0.95mm+/-3.1, p=0.001) than those who were fused. Postoperatively, VBT patients have an overall higher L4-S1 Lordosis (36.0degree+/-10.1vs 18.3degree+/-12.5, p=0.001), cSVA (3.4mm+/-1.4 vs -3.7mm+/-2.1, p=0.001), and lower CL (-4.3degree+/-18.4 vs 7.0degree+/-12.2, p=0.001). The PSF cohort had a larger change in cSVA (2.8mm+/-4.0 vs 0mm+/-1.6, p=0.001) from baseline to 2-year follow-up compared to VBT. No differences in the change of L4-S1 Lordosis (VBT 1.5degree+/-12.3 vs 4.1degree+/-10.9, p=0.3), TPA (VBT -1.6degree+/-6.8 vs -1.4degree+/-8.5, p=0.89), PT (VBT -0.5degree+/-7.8 vs -1.9degree+/-8.5, p=0.42), or PI-LL (0.2degree+/-12.0 vs -0.5degree+/-14.0, p=0.81) were observed.
CONCLUSION(S): VBT and PSF for AIS result in statistically similar changes in sagittal alignment parameters. The fact that we showed similar results comparing sagittal alignment in fusion and VBT groups indicates that VBT is non-inferior from a sagittal perspective. It is important to maintain sagittal alignment when correcting AIS. Future work can examine the long-term effect of VBT on sagittal alignment. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright

Background. Several different techniques exist to address the pain and disability caused by isolated nerve root impingement. Failure to adequately decompress the lumbar foramen may lead to failed back surgery syndrome. However, aggressive treatment often causes spinal instability or may require fusion for satisfactory results. We describe a novel technique for decompression of the lumbar nerve root and demonstrate its effectiveness in relief of radicular symptoms. Methods. Partial facetectomy was performed by removal of the medial portion of the superior facet in patients with lumbar foraminal stenosis. 47 patients underwent the procedure from 2001 to 2010. Those who demonstrated neurogenic claudication without spinal instability or central canal stenosis and failed conservative management were eligible for the procedure. Functional level was recorded for each patient. These patients were followed for an average of 3.9 years to evaluate outcomes. Results. 27 of 47 patients (57%) reported no back pain and no functional limitations. Eight of 47 patients (17%) reported moderate pain, but had no limitations. Six of 47 patients (13%) continued to experience degenerative symptoms. Five of 47 patients (11%) required additional surgery. Conclusions. Partial facetectomy is an effective means to decompress the lumbar nerve root foramen without causing spinal instability.

Surgical-site infection (SSI ) in the spine is a serious postoperative complication. Factors such as posterior surgical approach, arthrodesis, use of spinal instrumentation, age, obesity, diabetes, tobacco use, operating-room environment and estimated blood loss are well established in the literature to affect the risk of infection. Infection after spine surgery with instrumentation is becoming a common pathology. The reported infection rates range from 0.7% to 11.9%, depending on the diagnosis and complexity of the procedure. Besides operative factors, patient characteristics could also account for increased infection rates. These infections after instrumented spinal fusion are particularly difficult to manage due to the implanted, and possibly infected, instrumentation. Because the medical, economic and social costs of SSI after spinal instrumentation are enormous, any significant reduction in risks will pay dividends. The goal of this literature review was to analyse risk factors, causative organisms, diagnostic elements (both clinical and biological), different treatment options and their efficiency and consequences and the means of SSI prevention.