Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Surgical outcome differences between the 3D subtypes of right thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Spine Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The current classifications of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) aim to guide surgical decision making. However, variance exists within treatment recommendations and suboptimal outcomes have been observed while following these guidelines based on two-dimensional images. We used previously developed 3D classification for right thoracic AIS patients and aimed to determine the variation in surgical decision making and the risk of suboptimal outcomes in each subtype according to our classification.

Methods

Seventy-six right thoracic AIS patients with 2-year follow-up were included retrospectively. Five 3D preoperative subgroups were determined based on a previous classification system. The upper and lower instrumented vertebrae (UIV and LIV) and the radiographic surgical outcomes at 2-year [frontal balance (FB), proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK), and adding on] were compared between the subtypes.

Results

The fusion length and the rate of radiographic suboptimal outcomes were statistically different between the five groups. LIV at T12 in Type 1 and UIV at T2 in Type 2 were associated with improved FB and lower PJK, respectively. Type 3 had the highest rate of suboptimal FB and developing PJK. Type 4 had the longest fusion, and suboptimal FB was observed in 42% of the patients independent from the LIV level. Type 5 had the lowest rate of unsatisfactory radiographic outcomes at 2 years.

Conclusion

Following the preoperative 3D classification of the AIS patients, we showed that the UIV and LIV selection has a different impact on the surgical outcomes in each of the five subtypes. The proposed 3D classification has the potential for risk stratification following a posterior spinal surgery in right thoracic AIS.

Graphic abstract

These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Pasha S, Flynn J (2018) Data-driven classification of the 3D spinal curve in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis with an applications in surgical outcome prediction. Sci Rep 8:16296. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-34261-6

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Lenke LG, Betz RR, Harms J, Bridwell KH, Clements DH, Lowe TG, Blanke K (2001) Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a new classification to determine extent of spinal arthrodesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 83-A:1169–1181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Kadoury S, Labelle H (2012) Classification of three-dimensional thoracic deformities in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis from a multivariate analysis. Eur Spine J 21:40–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-011-2004-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Abelin-Genevois K, Sassi D, Verdun S, Roussouly P (2018) Sagittal classification in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: original description and therapeutic implications. Eur Spine J. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-018-5613-1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. King HA, Moe JH, Bradford DS, Winter RB (1983) The selection of fusion levels in thoracic idiopathic scoliosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 65:1302–1313

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Chang KW, Leng X, Zhao W, Chen YY, Chen TC, Chang KI (2011) Broader curve criteria for selective thoracic fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 36:1658 1664. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e318215fa73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Pasha S, Flynn JM, Sankar WN (2018) Outcomes of selective thoracic fusion for Lenke 1 adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: predictors of success from the sagittal plane. Eur Spine J. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-018-5553-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Stokes IA, Sangole AP, Aubin CE (2009) Classification of scoliosis deformity three-dimensional spinal shape by cluster analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 34:584–590. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e318190b914

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Pasha S, Hassanzadeh P, Ecker M, Ho V (2019) A hierarchical classification of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: Identifying the distinguishing features in 3D spinal deformities. PLoS ONE 14:e0213406. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0213406

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Pasha S, Cahill PJ, Dormans JP, Flynn JM (2016) Characterizing the differences between the 2D and 3D measurements of spine in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Eur Spine J 25:3137–3145. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-016-4582-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Pasha S, Ecker M, Deeney V (2018) Considerations in sagittal evaluation of the scoliotic spine. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 28:1039–1045. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-018-2175-1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. DeFrancesco CJ, Pasha S, Miller DJ, Betz RR, Clements DH, Fletcher ND, Glotzbecker MG, Hwang SW, Kelly MP, Lehman RA, Lonner BS, Newton PO, Roye BD, Sponseller PD, Upasani VV, Harms Study G, Cahill PJ (2018) Agreement between manual and computerized designation of neutral vertebra in idiopathic scoliosis. Spine Deform 6:644–650. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jspd.2018.03.001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Rose PS, Lenke LG (2007) Classification of operative adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: treatment guidelines. Orthop Clin North Am 38(521–529):vi. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocl.2007.06.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Pasha S, Baldwin K (2018) Are we simplifying balance evaluation in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis? Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 51:91–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2017.11.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kim YJ, Lenke LG, Bridwell KH, Kim J, Cho SK, Cheh G, Yoon J (2007) Proximal junctional kyphosis in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis after 3 different types of posterior segmental spinal instrumentation and fusions: incidence and risk factor analysis of 410 cases. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 32:2731–2738. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e31815a7ead

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Helgeson MD, Shah SA, Newton PO, Clements DH 3rd, Betz RR, Marks MC, Bastrom T, Harms Study G (2010) Evaluation of proximal junctional kyphosis in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis following pedicle screw, hook, or hybrid instrumentation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 35:177–181. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181c77f8c

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Wang Y, Hansen ES, Hoy K, Wu C, Bunger CE (2011) Distal adding-on phenomenon in Lenke 1A scoliosis: risk factor identification and treatment strategy comparison. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 36:1113–1122. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181f51e95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Lakhal W, Loret JE, de Bodman C, Fournier J, Bergerault F, de Courtivron B, Bonnard C (2014) The progression of lumbar curves in adolescent Lenke 1 scoliosis and the distal adding-on phenomenon. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 100:S249–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2014.03.012

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Pasha S, Baldwin K (2019) Preoperative sagittal spinal profile of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis lenke types and non-scoliotic adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 44:134–142. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000002748

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Cammarata M, Aubin CE, Wang X, Mac-Thiong JM (2014) Biomechanical risk factors for proximal junctional kyphosis: a detailed numerical analysis of surgical instrumentation variables. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 39:E500–E507. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000000222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Ilharreborde B (2018) Sagittal balance and idiopathic scoliosis: does final sagittal alignment influence outcomes, degeneration rate or failure rate? Eur Spine J 27:48–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-018-5472-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Pasha S, Ilharreborde B, Baldwin K (2019) Sagittal spinopelvic alignment after posterior spinal fusion in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 44:41–52. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000002736

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Pasha S, Aubin CE, Labelle H, Parent S, Mac-Thiong JM (2015) The biomechanical effects of spinal fusion on the sacral loading in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 30:981–987. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2015.06.019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Pasha S, Smith L, Sankar WN (2019) Bone remodeling and disc morphology in the distal unfused spine after spinal fusion in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine Deform 7(5):746–753

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Orthopedic Surgery, The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA, USA

    Saba Pasha & Keith Baldwin

  2. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA

    Saba Pasha

Authors
  1. Saba Pasha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Keith Baldwin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Saba Pasha.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest to disclose.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (PPTX 566 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pasha, S., Baldwin, K. Surgical outcome differences between the 3D subtypes of right thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Eur Spine J 28, 3076–3084 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-019-06145-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-019-06145-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation