Cargando…

Revision Strategies for Harrington Rod Instrumentation: Radiographic Outcomes and Complications

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case series. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the clinical and radiographic outcomes following revision surgery following Harrington rod instrumentation. METHODS: Patients who underwent revision surgery with a minimum of 1-year follow-up for flatback sy...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Louie, Philip K., Iyer, Sravisht, Khanna, Krishn, Harada, Garrett K., Khalid, Alina, Gupta, Munish, Burton, Douglas, Shaffrey, Christopher, Lafage, Renaud, Lafage, Virginie, Dewald, Christopher J., Schwab, Frank J., Kim, Han Jo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9109553/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33000651
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2192568220960759
_version_ 1784708915458473984
author Louie, Philip K.
Iyer, Sravisht
Khanna, Krishn
Harada, Garrett K.
Khalid, Alina
Gupta, Munish
Burton, Douglas
Shaffrey, Christopher
Lafage, Renaud
Lafage, Virginie
Dewald, Christopher J.
Schwab, Frank J.
Kim, Han Jo
author_facet Louie, Philip K.
Iyer, Sravisht
Khanna, Krishn
Harada, Garrett K.
Khalid, Alina
Gupta, Munish
Burton, Douglas
Shaffrey, Christopher
Lafage, Renaud
Lafage, Virginie
Dewald, Christopher J.
Schwab, Frank J.
Kim, Han Jo
author_sort Louie, Philip K.
collection PubMed
description STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case series. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the clinical and radiographic outcomes following revision surgery following Harrington rod instrumentation. METHODS: Patients who underwent revision surgery with a minimum of 1-year follow-up for flatback syndrome following Harrington rod instrumentation for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis were identified from a multicenter dataset. Baseline demographics and intraoperative information were obtained. Preoperative, initial postoperative, and most recent spinopelvic parameters were compared. Postoperative complications and reoperations were subsequently evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 41 patients met the inclusion criteria with an average follow-up of 27.7 months. Overall, 14 patients (34.1%) underwent a combined anterior-posterior fusion, and 27 (65.9%) underwent an osteotomy for correction. Preoperatively, the most common lower instrumented vertebra (LIV) was at L3 and L4 (61%), whereas 85% had a LIV to the pelvis after revision. The mean preoperative pelvic incidence–lumbar lordosis mismatch and C7 sagittal vertical axis were 23.7° and 89.6 mm. This was corrected to 8.1° and 28.9 mm and maintained to 9.04° and 34.4 mm at latest follow-up. Complications included deep wound infection (12.2%), durotomy (14.6%), implant related failures (14.6%), and temporary neurologic deficits (22.0%). Eight patients underwent further revision surgery at an average of 7.4 months after initial revision. CONCLUSIONS: There are multiple surgical techniques to address symptomatic flatback syndrome in patients with previous Harrington rod instrumentation for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. At an average of 27.7 months follow-up, pelvic incidence–lumbar lordosis mismatch and C7 sagittal vertical axis can be successfully corrected and maintained. However, complication and reoperation rates remain high.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9109553
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-91095532022-05-17 Revision Strategies for Harrington Rod Instrumentation: Radiographic Outcomes and Complications Louie, Philip K. Iyer, Sravisht Khanna, Krishn Harada, Garrett K. Khalid, Alina Gupta, Munish Burton, Douglas Shaffrey, Christopher Lafage, Renaud Lafage, Virginie Dewald, Christopher J. Schwab, Frank J. Kim, Han Jo Global Spine J Original Articles STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case series. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the clinical and radiographic outcomes following revision surgery following Harrington rod instrumentation. METHODS: Patients who underwent revision surgery with a minimum of 1-year follow-up for flatback syndrome following Harrington rod instrumentation for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis were identified from a multicenter dataset. Baseline demographics and intraoperative information were obtained. Preoperative, initial postoperative, and most recent spinopelvic parameters were compared. Postoperative complications and reoperations were subsequently evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 41 patients met the inclusion criteria with an average follow-up of 27.7 months. Overall, 14 patients (34.1%) underwent a combined anterior-posterior fusion, and 27 (65.9%) underwent an osteotomy for correction. Preoperatively, the most common lower instrumented vertebra (LIV) was at L3 and L4 (61%), whereas 85% had a LIV to the pelvis after revision. The mean preoperative pelvic incidence–lumbar lordosis mismatch and C7 sagittal vertical axis were 23.7° and 89.6 mm. This was corrected to 8.1° and 28.9 mm and maintained to 9.04° and 34.4 mm at latest follow-up. Complications included deep wound infection (12.2%), durotomy (14.6%), implant related failures (14.6%), and temporary neurologic deficits (22.0%). Eight patients underwent further revision surgery at an average of 7.4 months after initial revision. CONCLUSIONS: There are multiple surgical techniques to address symptomatic flatback syndrome in patients with previous Harrington rod instrumentation for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. At an average of 27.7 months follow-up, pelvic incidence–lumbar lordosis mismatch and C7 sagittal vertical axis can be successfully corrected and maintained. However, complication and reoperation rates remain high. SAGE Publications 2020-10-01 2022-05 /pmc/articles/PMC9109553/ /pubmed/33000651 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2192568220960759 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work as published without adaptation or alteration, without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Original Articles
Louie, Philip K.
Iyer, Sravisht
Khanna, Krishn
Harada, Garrett K.
Khalid, Alina
Gupta, Munish
Burton, Douglas
Shaffrey, Christopher
Lafage, Renaud
Lafage, Virginie
Dewald, Christopher J.
Schwab, Frank J.
Kim, Han Jo
Revision Strategies for Harrington Rod Instrumentation: Radiographic Outcomes and Complications
title Revision Strategies for Harrington Rod Instrumentation: Radiographic Outcomes and Complications
title_full Revision Strategies for Harrington Rod Instrumentation: Radiographic Outcomes and Complications
title_fullStr Revision Strategies for Harrington Rod Instrumentation: Radiographic Outcomes and Complications
title_full_unstemmed Revision Strategies for Harrington Rod Instrumentation: Radiographic Outcomes and Complications
title_short Revision Strategies for Harrington Rod Instrumentation: Radiographic Outcomes and Complications
title_sort revision strategies for harrington rod instrumentation: radiographic outcomes and complications
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9109553/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33000651
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2192568220960759
work_keys_str_mv AT louiephilipk revisionstrategiesforharringtonrodinstrumentationradiographicoutcomesandcomplications
AT iyersravisht revisionstrategiesforharringtonrodinstrumentationradiographicoutcomesandcomplications
AT khannakrishn revisionstrategiesforharringtonrodinstrumentationradiographicoutcomesandcomplications
AT haradagarrettk revisionstrategiesforharringtonrodinstrumentationradiographicoutcomesandcomplications
AT khalidalina revisionstrategiesforharringtonrodinstrumentationradiographicoutcomesandcomplications
AT guptamunish revisionstrategiesforharringtonrodinstrumentationradiographicoutcomesandcomplications
AT burtondouglas revisionstrategiesforharringtonrodinstrumentationradiographicoutcomesandcomplications
AT shaffreychristopher revisionstrategiesforharringtonrodinstrumentationradiographicoutcomesandcomplications
AT lafagerenaud revisionstrategiesforharringtonrodinstrumentationradiographicoutcomesandcomplications
AT lafagevirginie revisionstrategiesforharringtonrodinstrumentationradiographicoutcomesandcomplications
AT dewaldchristopherj revisionstrategiesforharringtonrodinstrumentationradiographicoutcomesandcomplications
AT schwabfrankj revisionstrategiesforharringtonrodinstrumentationradiographicoutcomesandcomplications
AT kimhanjo revisionstrategiesforharringtonrodinstrumentationradiographicoutcomesandcomplications