Short anterior correction of the thoracolumbar/lumbar curve in King 1 idiopathic scoliosis: the behaviour of the instrumented and non-instrumented curves and the trunk balance

This is a retrospective clinical, radiological and patient outcome assessment of 21 consecutive patients with King 1 idiopathic adolescent scoliosis treated by short anterior selective fusion of the major thoracolumbar/lumbar (TL/L) curve. Three-dimensional changes of both curves, changes in trunk balance and rib hump were evaluated. The minimal follow-up was 24 months (max. 83). The Cobb angle of the TL/L curve was 52 degrees (45-67 degrees) with a flexibility of 72% (40-100%). The average length of the main curve was 5 (3-8) segments. An average of 3 (2-4) segments was fused using rigid single rod implants with side-loading screws. The Cobb angle of the thoracic curve was 33 degrees (18-50 degrees) with a flexibility of 69% (29-100%). The thoracic curve in bending was less than 20 degrees in 17 patients, and 20-25 degrees in 4 patients. In the TL/L curve there was an improvement of the Cobb angle of 67%, of the apex vertebral rotation of 51% and of the apex vertebral translation of 74%. The Cobb angle of the thoracic curve improved 29% spontaneously. Shoulder balance improved significantly from an average preoperative imbalance of 14.5-3.1 mm at the last follow-up. Seventy-five percent of the patients with preoperative positive shoulder imbalance (higher on the side of the thoracic curve) had levelled shoulders at the last follow-up. C7 offset improved from a preoperative 19.8 (0-40) to 4.8 (0-18) mm at the last follow-up. There were no significant changes in rotation, translation of the thoracic curve and the clinical rib hump. There were no significant changes in thoracic kyphosis or lumbar lordosis. The average score of the SRS-24 questionnaire at the last follow-up was 91 points (max. 120). We conclude that short anterior selective fusion of the TL/L curve in King 1 scoliosis with a thoracic curve bending to 25 degrees or less (Type 5 according to Lenke classification) results in a satisfactory correction and a balanced spine. Short fusions leave enough mobile lumbar segments for the establishment of global spinal balance. A positive shoulder imbalance is not a contraindication for this procedure. Structural interbody grafts are not necessary to maintain lumbar lordosis.

Patient outcomes after laminotomy, hemilaminectomy, laminectomy and laminectomy with instrumented fusion for spinal canal stenosis: a propensity score-based study from the Spine Tango registry.

PURPOSE To compare patient outcomes and complication rates after different decompression techniques or instrumented fusion (IF) in lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). METHODS The multicentre study was based on Spine Tango data. Inclusion criteria were LSS with a posterior decompression and pre- and postoperative COMI assessment between 3 and 24 months. 1,176 cases were assigned to four groups: (1) laminotomy (n = 642), (2) hemilaminectomy (n = 196), (3) laminectomy (n = 230) and (4) laminectomy combined with an IF (n = 108). Clinical outcomes were achievement of minimum relevant change in COMI back and leg pain and COMI score (2.2 points), surgical and general complications, measures taken due to complications, and reintervention on the index level based on patient information. The inverse propensity score weighting method was used for adjustment. RESULTS Laminotomy, hemilaminectomy and laminectomy were significantly less beneficial than laminectomy in combination with IF regarding leg pain (ORs with 95% CI 0.52, 0.34-0.81; 0.25, 0.15-0.41; 0.44, 0.27-0.72, respectively) and COMI score improvement (ORs with 95% CI 0.51, 0.33-0.81; 0.30, 0.18-0.51; 0.48, 0.29-0.79, respectively). However, the sole decompressions caused significantly fewer surgical (ORs with 95% CI 0.42, 0.26-0.69; 0.33, 0.17-0.63; 0.39, 0.21-0.71, respectively) and general complications (ORs with 95% CI 0.11, 0.04-0.29; 0.03, 0.003-0.41; 0.25, 0.09-0.71, respectively) than laminectomy in combination with IF. Accordingly, the likelihood of required measures was also significantly lower after laminotomy (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.17-0.46), hemilaminectomy (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.15-0.53) and after laminectomy (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.22-0.68) in comparison with laminectomy with IF. The likelihood of a reintervention was not significantly different between the treatment groups. DISCUSSION As already demonstrated in the literature, decompression in patients with LSS is a very effective treatment. Despite better patient outcomes after laminectomy in combination with IF, caution is advised due to higher rates of surgical and general complications and consequent required measures. Based on the current study, laminotomy or laminectomy, rather than hemilaminectomy, is recommendable for minimum relevant pain relief.