Cargando…

Evaluation and Comparation of a Novel Surgical Technique and Hemivertebra Resection to the Correction of Congenital Cervical Scoliosis in Lower Cervical and Cervicothoracic Spine

OBJECTIVE: To report concave-side distraction technique to treat congenital cervical scoliosis in lower cervical and cervicothoracic spine. To evaluate and compare clinical and radiographic results of this procedure with classic hemivertebra resection procedure. METHODS: This study reviewed 29 patie...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cao, Shuo, Chen, Xin, Pan, Shengfa, Diao, Yinze, Zhao, Yanbin, Xia, Tian, Li, Weishi, Zhou, Feifei, Sun, Yu
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Korean Spinal Neurosurgery Society 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9816581/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36397249
http://dx.doi.org/10.14245/ns.2244554.277
_version_ 1784864567810064384
author Cao, Shuo
Chen, Xin
Pan, Shengfa
Diao, Yinze
Zhao, Yanbin
Xia, Tian
Li, Weishi
Zhou, Feifei
Sun, Yu
author_facet Cao, Shuo
Chen, Xin
Pan, Shengfa
Diao, Yinze
Zhao, Yanbin
Xia, Tian
Li, Weishi
Zhou, Feifei
Sun, Yu
author_sort Cao, Shuo
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To report concave-side distraction technique to treat congenital cervical scoliosis in lower cervical and cervicothoracic spine. To evaluate and compare clinical and radiographic results of this procedure with classic hemivertebra resection procedure. METHODS: This study reviewed 29 patients in last 13 years. These patients were divided into convex-side resection group (group R) and concave-side distraction group (group D). Radiographic assessment was based on parameter changes preoperatively, postoperatively and at last follow-up. Demographic data, surgical data and complications were also evaluated and compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: In group R, mean age was 8.9 ± 3.3 years and follow-up was 46 ± 18 months. Operation time and blood loss averaged 500 ± 100 minutes, 703 ± 367 mL. In group D, mean age was 9.9 ± 2.8 years and follow-up was 34 ± 14 months. Operation time and blood loss averaged 501 ± 112 minutes, 374 ± 181 mL. Structural Cobb angle was corrected from 29.4° ± 12.5° to 5.3° (2.1°–18.1°) (p = 0.001) and 33.7° ± 14.1° to 12.8° ± 11.4° (p < 0.001) in groups R and D. Compensatory Cobb angle had a spontaneous correction rate of 59.6% (40.0%–80.8%) and 59.7% ± 23.0% in groups R and D. Mandibular incline, clavicle angle and spine coronal balance were significantly improved at last follow-up in both groups. All correction rates were not statistically different between groups. However, group D had significant less blood loss (p < 0.001) and operation time (p = 0.004) per vertebra than group R. Seven patients developed C5 nerve root palsy and recovered by 6 months of follow-up. CONCLUSION: Both surgical procedures are safe and effective in correcting congenital cervical scoliosis. But concave-side distraction technique has less blood loss and time-consuming during surgery, which provides a better option for the treatment of congenital cervical scoliosis.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9816581
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Korean Spinal Neurosurgery Society
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98165812023-01-11 Evaluation and Comparation of a Novel Surgical Technique and Hemivertebra Resection to the Correction of Congenital Cervical Scoliosis in Lower Cervical and Cervicothoracic Spine Cao, Shuo Chen, Xin Pan, Shengfa Diao, Yinze Zhao, Yanbin Xia, Tian Li, Weishi Zhou, Feifei Sun, Yu Neurospine Original Article OBJECTIVE: To report concave-side distraction technique to treat congenital cervical scoliosis in lower cervical and cervicothoracic spine. To evaluate and compare clinical and radiographic results of this procedure with classic hemivertebra resection procedure. METHODS: This study reviewed 29 patients in last 13 years. These patients were divided into convex-side resection group (group R) and concave-side distraction group (group D). Radiographic assessment was based on parameter changes preoperatively, postoperatively and at last follow-up. Demographic data, surgical data and complications were also evaluated and compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: In group R, mean age was 8.9 ± 3.3 years and follow-up was 46 ± 18 months. Operation time and blood loss averaged 500 ± 100 minutes, 703 ± 367 mL. In group D, mean age was 9.9 ± 2.8 years and follow-up was 34 ± 14 months. Operation time and blood loss averaged 501 ± 112 minutes, 374 ± 181 mL. Structural Cobb angle was corrected from 29.4° ± 12.5° to 5.3° (2.1°–18.1°) (p = 0.001) and 33.7° ± 14.1° to 12.8° ± 11.4° (p < 0.001) in groups R and D. Compensatory Cobb angle had a spontaneous correction rate of 59.6% (40.0%–80.8%) and 59.7% ± 23.0% in groups R and D. Mandibular incline, clavicle angle and spine coronal balance were significantly improved at last follow-up in both groups. All correction rates were not statistically different between groups. However, group D had significant less blood loss (p < 0.001) and operation time (p = 0.004) per vertebra than group R. Seven patients developed C5 nerve root palsy and recovered by 6 months of follow-up. CONCLUSION: Both surgical procedures are safe and effective in correcting congenital cervical scoliosis. But concave-side distraction technique has less blood loss and time-consuming during surgery, which provides a better option for the treatment of congenital cervical scoliosis. Korean Spinal Neurosurgery Society 2022-12 2022-11-18 /pmc/articles/PMC9816581/ /pubmed/36397249 http://dx.doi.org/10.14245/ns.2244554.277 Text en Copyright © 2022 by the Korean Spinal Neurosurgery Society https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) ) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Cao, Shuo
Chen, Xin
Pan, Shengfa
Diao, Yinze
Zhao, Yanbin
Xia, Tian
Li, Weishi
Zhou, Feifei
Sun, Yu
Evaluation and Comparation of a Novel Surgical Technique and Hemivertebra Resection to the Correction of Congenital Cervical Scoliosis in Lower Cervical and Cervicothoracic Spine
title Evaluation and Comparation of a Novel Surgical Technique and Hemivertebra Resection to the Correction of Congenital Cervical Scoliosis in Lower Cervical and Cervicothoracic Spine
title_full Evaluation and Comparation of a Novel Surgical Technique and Hemivertebra Resection to the Correction of Congenital Cervical Scoliosis in Lower Cervical and Cervicothoracic Spine
title_fullStr Evaluation and Comparation of a Novel Surgical Technique and Hemivertebra Resection to the Correction of Congenital Cervical Scoliosis in Lower Cervical and Cervicothoracic Spine
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation and Comparation of a Novel Surgical Technique and Hemivertebra Resection to the Correction of Congenital Cervical Scoliosis in Lower Cervical and Cervicothoracic Spine
title_short Evaluation and Comparation of a Novel Surgical Technique and Hemivertebra Resection to the Correction of Congenital Cervical Scoliosis in Lower Cervical and Cervicothoracic Spine
title_sort evaluation and comparation of a novel surgical technique and hemivertebra resection to the correction of congenital cervical scoliosis in lower cervical and cervicothoracic spine
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9816581/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36397249
http://dx.doi.org/10.14245/ns.2244554.277
work_keys_str_mv AT caoshuo evaluationandcomparationofanovelsurgicaltechniqueandhemivertebraresectiontothecorrectionofcongenitalcervicalscoliosisinlowercervicalandcervicothoracicspine
AT chenxin evaluationandcomparationofanovelsurgicaltechniqueandhemivertebraresectiontothecorrectionofcongenitalcervicalscoliosisinlowercervicalandcervicothoracicspine
AT panshengfa evaluationandcomparationofanovelsurgicaltechniqueandhemivertebraresectiontothecorrectionofcongenitalcervicalscoliosisinlowercervicalandcervicothoracicspine
AT diaoyinze evaluationandcomparationofanovelsurgicaltechniqueandhemivertebraresectiontothecorrectionofcongenitalcervicalscoliosisinlowercervicalandcervicothoracicspine
AT zhaoyanbin evaluationandcomparationofanovelsurgicaltechniqueandhemivertebraresectiontothecorrectionofcongenitalcervicalscoliosisinlowercervicalandcervicothoracicspine
AT xiatian evaluationandcomparationofanovelsurgicaltechniqueandhemivertebraresectiontothecorrectionofcongenitalcervicalscoliosisinlowercervicalandcervicothoracicspine
AT liweishi evaluationandcomparationofanovelsurgicaltechniqueandhemivertebraresectiontothecorrectionofcongenitalcervicalscoliosisinlowercervicalandcervicothoracicspine
AT zhoufeifei evaluationandcomparationofanovelsurgicaltechniqueandhemivertebraresectiontothecorrectionofcongenitalcervicalscoliosisinlowercervicalandcervicothoracicspine
AT sunyu evaluationandcomparationofanovelsurgicaltechniqueandhemivertebraresectiontothecorrectionofcongenitalcervicalscoliosisinlowercervicalandcervicothoracicspine