Cargando…
Comparison of treatment outcomes between growth-sparing instrumentation and definitive one-stage fusion for EOS patients ages 6–10 years
PURPOSE: To compare objective outcomes for EOS patients age 6–10 years treated by growth-sparing (GS) surgery or definitive one-stage correction and fusion (DF). METHODS: We reviewed surgical, radiographic, PFT’s, and EOSQ-24 outcomes for EOS patients > age 6 at index surgery treated at a single...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer International Publishing
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10587013/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37480508 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s43390-023-00731-9 |
_version_ | 1785123266636021760 |
---|---|
author | Johnston, Charles E. Thornberg, David C. Palmer, Robert |
author_facet | Johnston, Charles E. Thornberg, David C. Palmer, Robert |
author_sort | Johnston, Charles E. |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: To compare objective outcomes for EOS patients age 6–10 years treated by growth-sparing (GS) surgery or definitive one-stage correction and fusion (DF). METHODS: We reviewed surgical, radiographic, PFT’s, and EOSQ-24 outcomes for EOS patients > age 6 at index surgery treated at a single institution, minimum 2-year follow-up. Neuromuscular diagnoses were excluded. RESULTS: 47 patients underwent index surgery between age 6 and 10.9 years. Twenty-one had DF, 26 had GS surgery (13 MCGR, 13 TGR). Diagnoses included 15 congenital, 15 idiopathic, 17 syndromic. Age at index was 9.1 years DF, 7.8 GS (p < .001). Follow-up was 63–78 months. 18/26 GS cases converted to DF, 13 due to complications, which occurred in 8/21 DF cases vs 19/26 GS (p = .016). DF patients had fewer post-index surgeries (0.6 vs 3.7, p < .001). At follow-up there were no differences in curve magnitudes, %correction, T1–12/T1-S1 segment lengths, EOSQ-24 scores or PFTs. 18 patients converting to DF after initial GS had equal outcomes as DF initially. 31 patients > age 8 at index (“tweeners”) were studied separately. 13 had GS surgery (7 MCGR), 18 had DF. At > 60 months follow-up, curve magnitudes, spine lengths, PFT’s, or EOSQ scores were equivalent. DF patients had fewer procedures and complications. CONCLUSION: For patients age 6–10.9 years, outcomes were no different at > 5 year follow-up between DF and GS groups. DF patients had fewer total surgeries and complications. Equal outcomes also occurred for tweeners. As a result, GS treatment does not appear to benefit patients > age 8. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10587013 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Springer International Publishing |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-105870132023-10-21 Comparison of treatment outcomes between growth-sparing instrumentation and definitive one-stage fusion for EOS patients ages 6–10 years Johnston, Charles E. Thornberg, David C. Palmer, Robert Spine Deform Case Series PURPOSE: To compare objective outcomes for EOS patients age 6–10 years treated by growth-sparing (GS) surgery or definitive one-stage correction and fusion (DF). METHODS: We reviewed surgical, radiographic, PFT’s, and EOSQ-24 outcomes for EOS patients > age 6 at index surgery treated at a single institution, minimum 2-year follow-up. Neuromuscular diagnoses were excluded. RESULTS: 47 patients underwent index surgery between age 6 and 10.9 years. Twenty-one had DF, 26 had GS surgery (13 MCGR, 13 TGR). Diagnoses included 15 congenital, 15 idiopathic, 17 syndromic. Age at index was 9.1 years DF, 7.8 GS (p < .001). Follow-up was 63–78 months. 18/26 GS cases converted to DF, 13 due to complications, which occurred in 8/21 DF cases vs 19/26 GS (p = .016). DF patients had fewer post-index surgeries (0.6 vs 3.7, p < .001). At follow-up there were no differences in curve magnitudes, %correction, T1–12/T1-S1 segment lengths, EOSQ-24 scores or PFTs. 18 patients converting to DF after initial GS had equal outcomes as DF initially. 31 patients > age 8 at index (“tweeners”) were studied separately. 13 had GS surgery (7 MCGR), 18 had DF. At > 60 months follow-up, curve magnitudes, spine lengths, PFT’s, or EOSQ scores were equivalent. DF patients had fewer procedures and complications. CONCLUSION: For patients age 6–10.9 years, outcomes were no different at > 5 year follow-up between DF and GS groups. DF patients had fewer total surgeries and complications. Equal outcomes also occurred for tweeners. As a result, GS treatment does not appear to benefit patients > age 8. Springer International Publishing 2023-07-22 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC10587013/ /pubmed/37480508 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s43390-023-00731-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Case Series Johnston, Charles E. Thornberg, David C. Palmer, Robert Comparison of treatment outcomes between growth-sparing instrumentation and definitive one-stage fusion for EOS patients ages 6–10 years |
title | Comparison of treatment outcomes between growth-sparing instrumentation and definitive one-stage fusion for EOS patients ages 6–10 years |
title_full | Comparison of treatment outcomes between growth-sparing instrumentation and definitive one-stage fusion for EOS patients ages 6–10 years |
title_fullStr | Comparison of treatment outcomes between growth-sparing instrumentation and definitive one-stage fusion for EOS patients ages 6–10 years |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of treatment outcomes between growth-sparing instrumentation and definitive one-stage fusion for EOS patients ages 6–10 years |
title_short | Comparison of treatment outcomes between growth-sparing instrumentation and definitive one-stage fusion for EOS patients ages 6–10 years |
title_sort | comparison of treatment outcomes between growth-sparing instrumentation and definitive one-stage fusion for eos patients ages 6–10 years |
topic | Case Series |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10587013/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37480508 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s43390-023-00731-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT johnstoncharlese comparisonoftreatmentoutcomesbetweengrowthsparinginstrumentationanddefinitiveonestagefusionforeospatientsages610years AT thornbergdavidc comparisonoftreatmentoutcomesbetweengrowthsparinginstrumentationanddefinitiveonestagefusionforeospatientsages610years AT palmerrobert comparisonoftreatmentoutcomesbetweengrowthsparinginstrumentationanddefinitiveonestagefusionforeospatientsages610years |