Autofusion in growing rod surgery for early onset scoliosis; what do we know so far?

The evolving landscape of early onset scoliosis management has shifted from the traditional paradigm of early definitive spinal fusion towards modern growth-friendly implants, particularly Growing Rods (GR). Despite the initial classification of GR treatment as a fusionless procedure, the phenomenon of autofusion has emerged as a critical consideration in understanding its outcomes. Studies have demonstrated the presence of autofusion since the early 1980s. The consequences of autofusion are extensive, impacting curve correction, diminishing trunk growth rate, and contributing to the "law of diminishing returns" in growing rod surgery. The literature suggests that autofusion may complicate definitive fusion surgery, leading to prolonged and intricate procedures involving multiple osteotomies. Additionally, it poses challenges in identifying anatomical landmarks during surgery, potentially increasing the risk of complications and revisions. While autofusion poses challenges to achieving optimal outcomes in growing rod treatment, it cannot be considered a standalone replacement for definitive fusion. Recent advances aim to limit autofusion and enhance treatment outcomes. In this review, we will delve into the existing literature on autofusion, examining studies that have documented its presence, probable causes, pathophysiology, potential implications for long-term patient outcomes, and possible new implants and techniques that decrease its incidence.

Posterior only approach for fifth lumbar corpectomy: indications and technical notes.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of a posterior-only approach for L5 corpectomy, with lumbopelvic fixation for treatment of secondaries, infections, or burst fractures. METHODS: Between 2010 and 2013, 17 patients with L5 pathology had corpectomy through a posterior-only approach, with reconstruction of the anterior column using titanium cages filled with bone graft. The indication for surgery was presence of secondaries in nine patients, spondylitis and spondylodiscitis in five patients and burst fractures due to high energy trauma in three patients. All patients underwent detailed neurological examination as well as plain radiography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging studies. RESULTS: This study included 17 patients (8 males and 9 females) with a mean age of 48.3 years. The mean operative time was 186.1 minutes with mean blood loss of 744 ml. No intra-operative or immediate post-operative complications were encountered. Three patients died during follow-up due to advanced malignancy. The remaining 14 patients were followed-up for a mean of 24.9 months. One patient had cut through of L3 screws two years after surgery requiring metal removal. One patient had asymptomatic broken screw, with no need for further intervention. CONCLUSIONS: L5 corpectomy is a challenging procedure indicated for treatment of various cases of metastasis, infections, or comminuted fractures. The posterior approach is safe, efficient, and allows both rigid posterior stabilization and anterior reconstruction after L5 corpectomy without the need for an anterior approach and its possible related morbidity.

Anterior versus posterior approach in surgical treatment of tuberculous spondylodiscitis of thoracic and lumbar spine.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to compare the clinical, radiological and functional outcome of anterior versus posterior surgical debridement and fixation in patients with thoracic and lumbar tuberculous spondylodiscitis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total number of 42 patients with tuberculous spondylodiscitis of the thoracic and lumbar spine treated surgically were included in this study. Twenty patients (group A) underwent anterior debridement, decompression and instrumentation by anterior approach. Twenty-two patients (group B) were operated by posterolateral (extracavitary) decompression and posterior instrumentation. Operative parameters, clinical, radiographic and functional results for the two groups were analyzed and compared. RESULTS: The average follow-up period was 15 months (range 12-24) in both groups. The average operative time, blood loss and blood transfusion of anterior group were significantly less than the posterior one. There was significant better back pain relief, kyphotic angle correction and less angle loss in the posterior group than anterior. There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding neurological recovery, functional outcome and fusion rate. CONCLUSION: Both anterolateral and posterolateral approaches are sufficient for achieving the goals of surgical treatment of thoracic and lumbar Pott's disease but posterolateral approach allows significant better kyphotic angle correction, less angle loss, better improvement in back pain but unfortunately more operative time and blood loss.