Vertebral growth modulation by posterior dynamic deformity correction device in skeletally immature patients with moderate adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective, comparative, multicenter. INTRODUCTION: Growth modulating spinal implants are used in the management of scoliosis such as anterior vertebral body tethering. A motion-sparing posterior device (PDDC) was recently approved for the treatment of moderate AIS. The purpose of this study was to determine if the PDDC can modulate growth in skeletally immature patients with AIS. METHODS: From a database of patients treated with the PDDC over 4 years, we identified those who had a minimum of 2 years follow-up. Pre-operative and post-operative Cobb angles and coronal plane wedging of the apical vertebra were evaluated on standing full length radiographs. Independent sample t test and one-way ANOVA with post-hoc Tukey HSD analysis was used to compare three groups in varying skeletal maturity: Risser 0-1, Risser 2-3, and Risser 4-5. RESULTS: 45 patients (14.2-years old, 11-17) were evaluated with a mean pre-op curve of 46° (35°-66°). The average preoperative major curve magnitude, of either Lenke 1 or 5 curve type, was similar among the three groups 47.6°, 46° and 41.5°. Deformity correction was similar in the three groups, with reduction to 26.4°, 20.4° and 26.2°, respectively, at final follow-up [p < 0.05]. Pre-op wedging 7.4° (3.8°-15°) was reduced after surgery to 5.7° (1°-15°) (p < 0.05). Of those patients, Risser 0-1 (n = 16) had preoperative wedging of 9.5° (6°-14.5°) that was reduced to 5.4° (1°-8°) postoperatively (p < 0.05); Risser 2-3 (n = 15) had pre-op 7.7° (4°-15°) vs. post-op 7.0° (3°-15°); Risser 4-5 (n = 14) had pre-op 4.8° (3.8°-6.5°) vs. post-op 4.7° (3.7°-6.5°). Delta Wedging in Risser 0-1 stage was significantly different than for Risser 2-3 and for Risser 4-5. CONCLUSION: The posterior dynamic deformity correction device was able to modulate vertebral body wedging in skeletally immature patients with AIS. This was most evident in patients who were Risser 0-1. In contrast, curve correction was similar among the three groups. This finding lends support to the device's ability to modulate growth.

Surgical management of moderate adolescent idiopathic scoliosis with ApiFix®: a short peri- apical fixation followed by post-operative curve reduction with exercises.

Surgery in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is a major operative intervention where 10-12 vertebrae are instrumented and fused. A smaller motion preserving surgery would be more desirable for these otherwise healthy adolescents. The ApiFix® system is a novel less invasive short segment pedicle screw based instrumentation inserted around the apex of the main curve. The system has a ratchet mechanism that enables gradual postoperative device elongation and curve correction. The ratchet is activated by performing specific spinal exercises. The unique features of the device allow curve correction without fusion. The system which has a CE approval was employed in adolescents with main thoracic curves. More than a dozen of ApiFix surgeries have been performed so far. The preoperative Cobb angle was 45° ± 8, and 25° ± 8 at final follow up. The following is a report on three adolescent females aged 13-16 years with curves between 43°-53° and Risser sign of 1-4 who underwent surgery with ApiFix®. Two pedicle screws were inserted around the curve apex and the ratchet based device with polyaxial ring connectors was attached to the screws. No fusion attempt was made. Operative time was around one hour. Two weeks after surgery the patients were instructed to perform Schroth like daily exercises with the aim of rod elongation and gradual curve correction. Patients were followed between 6 months to 2 years. Curves were reduced and maintained between 22- 33°. Patients were pain free and were able to perform their spinal exercises. Postoperative gradual elongation of the device was observed. No screw loosening or rod breakage were observed. No adding on or curve progression was seen. Three factors may contribute to the ApiFix® success: polyaxial connections that prevent mechanical failure, gradual curve correction by spinal motion and spinal growth modulation. The ApiFix® system allows managing moderate AIS with a simple and minor surgical intervention. Recovery is rapid with negligible motion loss. It allows gradual and safe curve correction with high patient satisfaction. It may also serve as an internal brace for AIS.

Use of instrumented pedicle screws to evaluate load sharing in posterior dynamic stabilization systems.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Dynamic stabilization is an alternative to fusion intended to eliminate or at least minimize the potential for adjacent level degeneration. Different design approaches are used in pedicle screw-based systems that should have very different effects on the loading of the posterior column and intervertebral disc. If the implant system distributes these loads more evenly, loads in the pedicle screws will be reduced, and screw loosening will be prevented. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine how two different design approaches to dynamic stabilization systems, Dynesys System and the Total Posterior Spine (TOPS) System, affect the load carried by the pedicle screws. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: A controlled laboratory study in which the magnitude of the moments on pedicle screws during flexion-extension and lateral bending were measured after implantation of two posterior dynamic stabilization devices into cadaveric spines. METHODS: Five lumbar spines were tested in flexion-extension and lateral bending. Specimens were tested sequentially: first intact, then with the Dynesys system implanted, and finally with the TOPS system implanted. Range of motion (ROM) for each construct was measured with a 210N and 630N compressive load. The pedicle screws were instrumented with strain gages, which were calibrated so that the moments on the screws could be determined from the strain measurements. RESULTS: Compared with intact values, ROM decreased in flexion-extension and lateral bending when the Dynesys System was implanted. With implantation of the TOPS System, ROM returned to values that were not significantly different from the intact values. The moments in the screws with the Dynesys System were significantly higher than with the TOPS System with increases of as much as 56% in flexion-extension and 86% in lateral bending. CONCLUSIONS: The design of the posterior stabilization device influences the amount of load seen by the pedicle screws and therefore the load sharing between spinal implant and bone.