The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American). 2007;89:142-156.
doi:10.2106/JBJS.F.01389
© 2007 The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow [Supplementary Material]
Right arrow Letters to the Editor: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Letters to the Editor are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Related articles in JBJS
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Rights and Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lonner, B. S.
Right arrow Articles by Scharf, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Lonner, B. S.
Right arrow Articles by Scharf, C.
Related Collections
Right arrow Surgical Techniques
Right arrow Spine
Right arrow Pediatrics
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Facebook   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Thoracoscopic Spinal Fusion Compared with Posterior Spinal Fusion for the Treatment of Thoracic Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis

Surgical Technique

Baron S. Lonner, MD1, Dimitry Kondrachov, MD2, Farhan Siddiqi, MD2, Victor Hayes, MD2 and Carrie Scharf, BA1

1 212 East 69th Street, New York, NY 10021. E-mail address for B.S. Lonner: blonner{at}nyc.rr.com
2 Department of Orthopaedics, Long Island Jewish-North Shore University Medical Center, 270-05 76th Avenue, New Hyde Park, NY 11040

Investigation performed at Lenox Hill Hospital, New York, NY

The original scientific article in which the surgical technique was presented was published in JBJS Vol. 88-A, pp. 1022-1034, May 2006

DISCLOSURE: The authors did not receive any outside funding or grants in support of their research for or preparation of this work. Neither they nor a member of their immediate families received payments or other benefits or a commitment or agreement to provide such benefits from a commercial entity. No commercial entity paid or directed, or agreed to pay or direct, any benefits to any research fund, foundation, division, center, clinical practice, or other charitable or nonprofit organization with which the authors, or a member of their immediate families, are affiliated or associated.

The line drawings in this article are the work of Joanne Haderer Müller of Haderer & Müller (biomedart{at}haderermuller.com).

BACKGROUND:

Posterior spinal fusion with segmental instrumentation is the gold standard for the surgical treatment of thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. More recently, anterior surgery and video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery with spinal instrumentation have become an option. The purpose of the present study was to compare the radiographic and clinical outcomes as well as pulmonary function in patients managed with either anterior thoracoscopic or posterior surgery.

METHODS:

Radiographic data, Scoliosis Research Society patient-based outcome questionnaires, pulmonary function, and operative records were reviewed for fifty-one patients undergoing surgical treatment of scoliosis. Data were collected preoperatively, immediately postoperatively, and at the time of the final follow-up. The radiographic parameters that were analyzed included coronal curve correction, the most caudad instrumented vertebra tilt angle correction, coronal balance, and thoracic kyphosis. The operative parameters that were evaluated included the operative time, the estimated blood loss, the blood transfusion rate, the number of levels fused, the type of bone graft used, and the number of intraoperative and postoperative complications. The pulmonary function parameters that were analyzed included vital capacity and peak flow.

RESULTS:

The thoracoscopic group included twenty-eight patients with a mean age of 14.6 years, and the posterior fusion group included twenty-three patients with a mean age of 14.3 years. The percent correction was 54.5% for the thoracoscopic group and 55.3% for the posterior group. With the numbers available, there were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of kyphosis (p = 0.84), coronal balance (p = 0.70), or tilt angle (p = 0.91) at the time of the final follow-up. The mean number of levels fused was 5.8 in the thoracoscopic group, compared with 9.3 levels in the posterior group (p < 0.0001). The estimated blood loss in the thoracoscopic group was significantly less than that in the posterior fusion group (361 mL compared with 545 mL; p = 0.03), and the transfusion rate in the thoracoscopic group was significantly lower than that in the posterior fusion group (14% compared with 43%; p = 0.01). Operative time in the thoracoscopic group was significantly greater than that in the posterior group (6.0 compared with 3.3 hours, p < 0.0001). There were no intraoperative complications in either group. Vital capacity and peak flow had returned to baseline levels in both groups at the time of the final follow-up. Patients in the thoracoscopic group scored higher than those in the posterior group in terms of the total score (p < 0.0001) and all of the domains (p < 0.01) of the Scoliosis Research Society questionnaire at the time of the final follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS:

Thoracoscopic spinal instrumentation compares favorably with posterior fusion in terms of coronal plane curve correction and balance, sagittal contour, the rate of complications, pulmonary function, and patient-based outcomes. The advantages of the procedure include the need for fewer levels of spinal fusion, less operative blood loss, lower transfusion requirements, and improved cosmesis as a result of small, well-hidden incisions. However, the operative time for the thoracoscopic procedure was nearly twice that for the posterior approach. Additional study is needed to determine the precise role of thoracoscopic spinal instrumentation in the treatment of thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?

Related articles in JBJS:

Thoracoscopic Spinal Fusion Compared with Posterior Spinal Fusion for the Treatment of Thoracic Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis
Baron S. Lonner, Dimitry Kondrachov, Farhan Siddiqi, Victor Hayes, and Carrie Scharf
JBJS 2006 88: 1022-1034. [Abstract] [Full Text]  



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 JBJSHome page
B. S. Lonner, J. D. Auerbach, M. Estreicher, A. H. Milby, and K. E. Kean
Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Spinal Fusion Compared with Posterior Spinal Fusion with Thoracic Pedicle Screws for Thoracic Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis
J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., February 1, 2009; 91(2): 398 - 408.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am J Sports MedHome page
M. L. Busam, M. T. Provencher, and B. R. Bach Jr
Complications of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With Bone-Patellar Tendon-Bone Constructs: Care and Prevention
Am. J. Sports Med., February 1, 2008; 36(2): 379 - 394.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]