Less correction with minimally invasive surgery for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis compared to open surgical correction

PURPOSE: In this study, we investigated the relationship between the results of thoracic curve correction using minimally invasive surgeries in 35 patients and open surgical correction in 47 patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. METHODS: The correlations between the Cobb’s angle of the primary and postoperative curves, angle of thoracic kyphosis and lumbar lordosis, correction percentage, derotation values, estimated blood loss, duration of surgery, and period of hospitalization after surgery were assessed by calculating the mean and standard deviation. Calculation and comparison were performed using Pearson correlation. RESULTS: The Cobb’s angle correction ranged from 53.4° ± 11.8° to 6.7° ± 5.2° (p < 0.001) in the open surgical correction group and from 51.2° ± 11.4° to 11.7° ± 5.8° (p < 0.001) in the minimally invasive surgery group before and after surgery, respectively. The percentage of curvature correction was 88.2% ± 8.0% and 77.7% ± 10.7% (p < 0.001) in the open surgical correction and minimally invasive surgery groups, respectively. The estimated blood loss was higher in the open surgical correction group than in the minimally invasive surgery group (208.7 ± 113.4 vs 564.3 ± 242.7 mL). Axial rotation was changed from 29.1°± 7.5 to 17.1°± 6.8 (p < 0.001) in the open surgical correction group and from 28.9°± 7.8 to 19.4°± 6.4 (p < 0.001) in the minimally invasive surgery group. The duration of surgery was shorter in the open surgical correction group than in the minimally invasive surgery group (266.6 ± 64.3 vs 346.2 ± 70.5 min). A positive correlation between time of operation and Cobb’s angle correction (in °) in open surgical correction (r = 0.37) and minimally invasive surgery (r = 0.43) was found. CONCLUSION: The open surgical correction procedures were more effective than minimally invasive surgery in correcting the spinal curve. The increase in the duration of open surgical correction increases the estimated blood loss, but it also more significantly improves the correction of Cobb’s angle. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.