ABSTRACT
STUDY DESIGN: Nonrandomized controlled cohort. OBJECTIVE: To compare early results between bipolar fusionless construct (BFC) and single posterior fusion (SPF) surgery in neuromuscular scoliosis (NMS). BACKGROUND: Surgical treatments for NMS have traditionally been characterized by high complication rates. A mini-invasive BFC was developed to reduce these risks while maintaining adequate curve reduction. There is, however, a current lack of studies comparing clinical and radiologic perioperative outcomes between both techniques. METHODS: All patients surgically treated for NMS with to-pelvis construct between 2011 and 2021 at 2 centers were included and divided into 2 groups according to the surgical technique (BFC or SPF). Gender, age, main deformity region, etiology, preoperative and postoperative main curve magnitude and pelvic obliquity, surgery time, estimated blood loss and transfusion rates, length of hospital stay, the magnitude of main curve and pelvic obliquity correction, and early complications were compared. Quantitative data were compared through ANOVA or Mann-Whitney test. Analysis of qualitative outcomes was performed through Fisher exact test and logistic regressions. Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare complications between groups. RESULTS: Eighty-nine NMS patients were included: 48 in the SPF group and 41 in the BFC group. Surgery time (203 vs. 241 min), rate (32 vs. 52%) and severity of complications, unplanned returns to the operating room (15 vs. 39%), estimated blood loss (179 vs. 364 cc), and transfusion rates (27 vs. 73%) were lower in the BFC group ( P <0.05). There were no significant differences in age, maturity stage, preoperative curve magnitude, preoperative pelvic obliquity and postoperative curve, and pelvic obliquity correction between groups. CONCLUSIONS: BFC may be a safer and less invasive option for NMS surgical treatment, resulting in similar curve corrections while significantly decreasing the number and severity of complications as well as intraoperative blood loss when compared with SPF. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level -lll.
