RÉSUMÉ
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study.PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to compare percent correction between apical and periapical pedicle screw (PS) and sublaminar wire constructs for Cobb correction and coronal balance correction.OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: The current gold standard for deformity correction in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) are PS constructs. Sublaminar wires provide an alternative means of fixation when PS fixation cannot be safely performed. Two previous studies have compared percent curve correction between sublaminar wires and PSs, with conflicting conclusions.METHODS: The study was a retrospective review of Lenke type 1 curves with minimum follow-up of at least 1 year. Cases were divided into two groups: constructs using apical/periapical sublaminar wires (SL group) versus PS only constructs (PS group). Percent Cobb correction and coronal balance were compared between the two groups at 1 year. A multivariable regression model was used to determine the impact of apical/periapical wires on percent Cobb correction and coronal balance at 1 year when accounting for additional variables.RESULTS: The cohort included 71 patients who were predominantly female (80.2%), with average age of 14.2 years. Only 21 (29.5%) of constructs utilized apical/periapical sublaminar wires. There was a significant difference in percent Cobb correction at 1 year for the PS and SL groups (70.26% vs. 60.09%, p=0.05). No difference was observed in overall coronal balance. A multivariable model revealed that apical/periapical wires were negatively associated with percent Cobb correction at 1 year (coefficient=−8.49, p=0.023), while total implant density of the construct was positively associated with correction (coefficient=24.2, p<0.001).CONCLUSIONS: Use of PSs in the apical and periapical zones resulted in improved percent Cobb correction at 1 year in patients with AIS Lenke type 1 curves. Sublaminar wires remain a useful surgical option and result in equivalent coronal balance compared to PSs.