Dursun Gokay, Ramazanov Rafik, Demirkiran Halil G, Ayvaz Mehmet, Yazici Muharrem
Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Acipayam State Hospital, Denizli, Turkey.
Pediatric Orthopaedic Spine Center.
J Pediatr Orthop. 2025 Aug 1;45(7):364-369. doi: 10.1097/BPO.0000000000002966. Epub 2025 Mar 28.
Growing rod treatment (GR) is one of the most popular methods for idiopathic EOS and is usually followed by posterior instrumented spinal fusion (PISF), which is also called graduation. Graduation surgery is technically demanding and complicated, leading to a tendency to avoid definitive fusion when there is an adequate improvement in scoliosis angle, no implant failure, and no need to change the instrumentation level. The aim of the present study was to compare the risks and benefits of PISF between patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) treated with standard PISF against those with idiopathic EOS treated with GR and graduated with PISF.
The study included patients with I-EOS who were treated with dual GR and PISF, and those with AIS who underwent standard PISF with AIS during the study period. The AIS and EOS groups were matched in terms of scoliosis curve magnitude, T2-T12 kyphosis, L1-S1 lordosis, sex, and age variables by propensity score matching.
Seven hundred seventy-six patients (24 EOS and 752 AIS) were included in the study. Seventy-two AIS patients were matched against 24 EOS patients. Statistically significant differences were found between the groups in terms of scoliosis correction percentage, surgical time, transfusion need, and number of instrumented segments. However, the percentage of T1-T12 length increase, percentage of T1-S1 length increase, instrumented spinal segment length increase, and the estimated blood loss were similar between the groups.
Although the EOS group had longer surgical time (30 min longer), more bleeding (75 cc more), and less correction of the coronal deformity, trunk height gained by definitive surgery was the same as that in the AIS group. There was a difference in favor of AIS between the groups in terms of coronal deformity correction rates, but the final deformity size in the EOS patients was clinically insignificant (22±13 degrees). Definitive fusion in EOS with idiopathic etiology does not carry an excessive risk for complications, and the gains obtained by the patients after surgery are comparable to AIS patients who underwent PISF surgery.
Level III.
生长棒治疗(GR)是治疗特发性早发性脊柱侧凸(EOS)最常用的方法之一,通常随后进行后路器械脊柱融合术(PISF),也称为“毕业手术”。毕业手术技术要求高且复杂,当脊柱侧凸角度有足够改善、无植入物失败且无需改变器械置入节段时,倾向于避免进行确定性融合。本研究的目的是比较接受标准PISF治疗的青少年特发性脊柱侧凸(AIS)患者与接受GR治疗并通过PISF“毕业”的特发性EOS患者之间PISF的风险和益处。
本研究纳入了接受双GR和PISF治疗的I-EOS患者,以及在研究期间接受标准PISF治疗AIS的患者。通过倾向评分匹配,在脊柱侧凸曲线大小、T2-T12后凸、L1-S1前凸、性别和年龄变量方面对AIS组和EOS组进行匹配。
776例患者(24例EOS和752例AIS)纳入研究。72例AIS患者与24例EOS患者匹配。两组在脊柱侧凸矫正百分比、手术时间、输血需求和器械置入节段数量方面存在统计学显著差异。然而,两组之间T1-T12长度增加百分比、T1-S1长度增加百分比、器械置入脊柱节段长度增加以及估计失血量相似。
虽然EOS组手术时间更长(长30分钟)、出血更多(多75cc)且冠状面畸形矫正较少,但确定性手术后获得的躯干高度与AIS组相同。两组在冠状面畸形矫正率方面有利于AIS组,但EOS患者的最终畸形大小在临床上无显著意义(22±13度)。特发性病因的EOS患者进行确定性融合不会带来过多并发症风险,患者术后获得的收益与接受PISF手术的AIS患者相当。
III级。