Comparison of intrathecal baclofen pump insertion and selective dorsal rhizotomy for nonambulatory children with predominantly spastic cerebral palsy.

OBJECTIVE: In nonambulatory children with predominantly spastic cerebral palsy (CP), the authors compared care needs, symptom burden, and complications after surgical treatment with either intrathecal baclofen (ITB) pump insertion or selective dorsal rhizotomy (SDR). The patients were treated at two Canadian centers with variability in practice pertaining to these surgical options. METHODS: The authors performed a retrospective analysis of nonambulatory children with predominantly spastic quadriplegic or diplegic CP who underwent treatment with ITB or SDR. These two strategies were retrospectively assessed by comparing patient data from the two treatment groups for demographic characteristics, outcomes, and complications. A partial least-squares analysis was performed to identify patient phenotypes associated with outcomes. RESULTS: Thirty patients who underwent ITB and 30 patients who underwent SDR were included for analysis. Patients in the ITB group were older and had lower baseline functional status, with greater burdens of spasticity, dystonia, pain, deformity, bladder dysfunction, and epilepsy than patients in the SDR group. In addition, children who underwent SDR had lower Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS) levels and were less likely to experience complications than those who underwent ITB. However, children treated with SDR had fewer improvements in pain than children treated with ITB. A single significant latent variable explaining 88% of the variance in the data was identified. CONCLUSIONS: Considerable baseline differences exist within this pediatric CP patient population. Factors specific to individual children must be taken into account when determining whether ITB or SDR is the appropriate treatment.

Sagittal Balance Correction Following Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Comparison of the Three Approaches.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to compare three widely used interbody fusion approaches in regard to their ability to correct sagittal balance, including pelvic parameters. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: Restoration of sagittal balance in lumbar spine surgery is associated with better postoperative outcomes. Various interbody fusion techniques can help to correct sagittal balance, with no clear consensus on which technique offers the best correction. METHODS: The charts and imaging of patients who have undergone surgery through either open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), minimally invasive TLIF (MIS TLIF), or oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) were retrospectively reviewed. The following sagittal balance parameters were measured pre- and postoperatively: segmental lordosis, lumbar lordosis, disk height, pelvic tilt, and pelvic incidence. Data on postoperative complications were gathered. RESULTS: Only OLIF managed to significantly improve segmental lordosis (4.4°, p <0.001) and lumbar lordosis (4.8°, p =0.049). All approaches significantly augmented disk height, with OLIF having the greatest effect (3.7°, p <0.001). No approaches were shown to significantly correct pelvic tilt. Pelvic incidence remained unchanged in all approaches. Open TLIF was the only approach with a higher rate of postoperative complications (33%, p =0.009). CONCLUSIONS: The OLIF approach might offer greater correction of sagittal balance over open and MIS TLIF, mainly in regard to segmental lordosis, lumbar lordosis, and disk height. MIS TLIF, although offering more limited access than open TLIF, was not inferior to open TLIF in regard to sagittal balance correction. A higher rate of complications was shown for open TLIF than the other approaches, possibly due to its more invasive nature.