Cargando…
Active Apex Correction (Modified SHILLA Technique) Versus Distraction-Based Growth Rod Fixation: What Do the Correction Parameters Say?
INTRODUCTION: SHILLA and growth rods are two main surgical correction techniques for patients with early-onset scoliosis. There have been some comparative studies between the two techniques, where a comparison was made between deformity identifying characteristics such as Cobb angle, apical vertebra...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
The Japanese Society for Spine Surgery and Related Research
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7002057/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32039294 http://dx.doi.org/10.22603/ssrr.2019-0045 |
_version_ | 1783494330923614208 |
---|---|
author | Agarwal, Aakash Aker, Loai Ahmad, Alaaeldin Azmi |
author_facet | Agarwal, Aakash Aker, Loai Ahmad, Alaaeldin Azmi |
author_sort | Agarwal, Aakash |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: SHILLA and growth rods are two main surgical correction techniques for patients with early-onset scoliosis. There have been some comparative studies between the two techniques, where a comparison was made between deformity identifying characteristics such as Cobb angle, apical vertebral translation, coronal balance, spinal length gain, etc. However, the SHILLA procedure experiences loss of correction or the reappearance of deformity through crankshafting or adding-on (e.g., distal migration). The current study identifies a solution with a modified approach to SHILLA (which could help in dynamically remodulating the apex of the deformity and mitigating loss of correction) and presents comparative correction data against the long-established traditional growth rod system. METHODS: The active apex correction (APC) group consisted of 20 patients and the growth rod group consisted of 26 patients, both with the same inclusion and exclusion criteria. The APC surgical procedure involved a modified SHILLA technique, that is, insertion of pedicle screws in the convex side of the vertebrae above and below the wedged one for compression and absence of apical fusion. RESULTS: There were no statistical differences between the various spinal parameters (namely, Cobb angle, apical vertebral translation, sagittal balance, and spinal length gain) of the two groups. However, significant differences existed for coronal balance, which in part may have been due to differences in its pre-op value between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: APC and the traditional growth rod system showed similar deformity correction parameters at current follow-ups; however, the latter requires multiple surgeries to regularly distract the spine. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7002057 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | The Japanese Society for Spine Surgery and Related Research |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-70020572020-02-07 Active Apex Correction (Modified SHILLA Technique) Versus Distraction-Based Growth Rod Fixation: What Do the Correction Parameters Say? Agarwal, Aakash Aker, Loai Ahmad, Alaaeldin Azmi Spine Surg Relat Res Original Article INTRODUCTION: SHILLA and growth rods are two main surgical correction techniques for patients with early-onset scoliosis. There have been some comparative studies between the two techniques, where a comparison was made between deformity identifying characteristics such as Cobb angle, apical vertebral translation, coronal balance, spinal length gain, etc. However, the SHILLA procedure experiences loss of correction or the reappearance of deformity through crankshafting or adding-on (e.g., distal migration). The current study identifies a solution with a modified approach to SHILLA (which could help in dynamically remodulating the apex of the deformity and mitigating loss of correction) and presents comparative correction data against the long-established traditional growth rod system. METHODS: The active apex correction (APC) group consisted of 20 patients and the growth rod group consisted of 26 patients, both with the same inclusion and exclusion criteria. The APC surgical procedure involved a modified SHILLA technique, that is, insertion of pedicle screws in the convex side of the vertebrae above and below the wedged one for compression and absence of apical fusion. RESULTS: There were no statistical differences between the various spinal parameters (namely, Cobb angle, apical vertebral translation, sagittal balance, and spinal length gain) of the two groups. However, significant differences existed for coronal balance, which in part may have been due to differences in its pre-op value between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: APC and the traditional growth rod system showed similar deformity correction parameters at current follow-ups; however, the latter requires multiple surgeries to regularly distract the spine. The Japanese Society for Spine Surgery and Related Research 2019-08-16 /pmc/articles/PMC7002057/ /pubmed/32039294 http://dx.doi.org/10.22603/ssrr.2019-0045 Text en Copyright © 2020 by The Japanese Society for Spine Surgery and Related Research https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Spine Surgery and Related Research is an Open Access journal distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. To view the details of this license, please visit (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Original Article Agarwal, Aakash Aker, Loai Ahmad, Alaaeldin Azmi Active Apex Correction (Modified SHILLA Technique) Versus Distraction-Based Growth Rod Fixation: What Do the Correction Parameters Say? |
title | Active Apex Correction (Modified SHILLA Technique) Versus Distraction-Based Growth Rod Fixation: What Do the Correction Parameters Say? |
title_full | Active Apex Correction (Modified SHILLA Technique) Versus Distraction-Based Growth Rod Fixation: What Do the Correction Parameters Say? |
title_fullStr | Active Apex Correction (Modified SHILLA Technique) Versus Distraction-Based Growth Rod Fixation: What Do the Correction Parameters Say? |
title_full_unstemmed | Active Apex Correction (Modified SHILLA Technique) Versus Distraction-Based Growth Rod Fixation: What Do the Correction Parameters Say? |
title_short | Active Apex Correction (Modified SHILLA Technique) Versus Distraction-Based Growth Rod Fixation: What Do the Correction Parameters Say? |
title_sort | active apex correction (modified shilla technique) versus distraction-based growth rod fixation: what do the correction parameters say? |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7002057/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32039294 http://dx.doi.org/10.22603/ssrr.2019-0045 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT agarwalaakash activeapexcorrectionmodifiedshillatechniqueversusdistractionbasedgrowthrodfixationwhatdothecorrectionparameterssay AT akerloai activeapexcorrectionmodifiedshillatechniqueversusdistractionbasedgrowthrodfixationwhatdothecorrectionparameterssay AT ahmadalaaeldinazmi activeapexcorrectionmodifiedshillatechniqueversusdistractionbasedgrowthrodfixationwhatdothecorrectionparameterssay |