采用磁控生长棒与脊柱后路融合术治疗的 "两岁 "患者的 LIV 选择。

IF 1.6 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Spine deformity Pub Date : 2024-12-15 DOI:10.1007/s43390-024-01019-2
Brandon Yoshida, Claudia Leonardi, Jacquelyn Valenzuela-Moss, Lindsay M Andras, Tyler A Tetreault, John B Emans, John T Smith, Joshua M Pahys, G Ying Li, Michael J Heffernan
{"title":"采用磁控生长棒与脊柱后路融合术治疗的 \"两岁 \"患者的 LIV 选择。","authors":"Brandon Yoshida, Claudia Leonardi, Jacquelyn Valenzuela-Moss, Lindsay M Andras, Tyler A Tetreault, John B Emans, John T Smith, Joshua M Pahys, G Ying Li, Michael J Heffernan","doi":"10.1007/s43390-024-01019-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this study was to compare the LIV selection in 'tweener' patients treated with MCGR or PSF.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A multicenter pediatric spine database was queried for ambulatory patients ages 8-11 years treated by MCGR or PSF with at least 2-year follow-up. The relationship between the LIV and preoperative spinal height, curve magnitude, and implant type were assessed. The relationship between the touched vertebrae (TV), the last substantially touched vertebrae (LSTV), the stable vertebrae (SV), and the LIV were evaluated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One hundred and fifty-nine patients met inclusion criteria. Preoperative curve magnitude was similar between groups (MCGR 68 ± 19.0° vs. PSF 66 ± 17.2°, p = 0.6). Preoperative curve magnitude was associated with LIV, as larger curves were associated with a more caudal LIV (p = 0.0004). Distribution of the LIV was more varied in PSF compared to MCGR. L3 was the LIV in 43% of MCGR patients compared to 27% of PSF patients. A thoracic LIV was more common in the PSF group (PSF 13% vs. MCGR 1.2%, p = 0.0038). The LIV was cephalad to the SV in 68% of PSF compared to 48% of MCGR patients (p = 0.02).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The majority of LIV selection in 'tweener' patients was at L3 or below regardless of surgical strategy, likely driven by curve magnitude. However, 'tweener' patients treated with PSF had more cephalad LIV selections compared to patients treated with MCGR. Potential LIV differences should be considered when selecting MCGR vs. PSF in 'tweener' patients.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>III.</p>","PeriodicalId":21796,"journal":{"name":"Spine deformity","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"LIV selection in 'tweener' patients treated with magnetically controlled growing rods vs. posterior spinal fusion.\",\"authors\":\"Brandon Yoshida, Claudia Leonardi, Jacquelyn Valenzuela-Moss, Lindsay M Andras, Tyler A Tetreault, John B Emans, John T Smith, Joshua M Pahys, G Ying Li, Michael J Heffernan\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s43390-024-01019-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this study was to compare the LIV selection in 'tweener' patients treated with MCGR or PSF.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A multicenter pediatric spine database was queried for ambulatory patients ages 8-11 years treated by MCGR or PSF with at least 2-year follow-up. The relationship between the LIV and preoperative spinal height, curve magnitude, and implant type were assessed. The relationship between the touched vertebrae (TV), the last substantially touched vertebrae (LSTV), the stable vertebrae (SV), and the LIV were evaluated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One hundred and fifty-nine patients met inclusion criteria. Preoperative curve magnitude was similar between groups (MCGR 68 ± 19.0° vs. PSF 66 ± 17.2°, p = 0.6). Preoperative curve magnitude was associated with LIV, as larger curves were associated with a more caudal LIV (p = 0.0004). Distribution of the LIV was more varied in PSF compared to MCGR. L3 was the LIV in 43% of MCGR patients compared to 27% of PSF patients. A thoracic LIV was more common in the PSF group (PSF 13% vs. MCGR 1.2%, p = 0.0038). The LIV was cephalad to the SV in 68% of PSF compared to 48% of MCGR patients (p = 0.02).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The majority of LIV selection in 'tweener' patients was at L3 or below regardless of surgical strategy, likely driven by curve magnitude. However, 'tweener' patients treated with PSF had more cephalad LIV selections compared to patients treated with MCGR. Potential LIV differences should be considered when selecting MCGR vs. PSF in 'tweener' patients.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>III.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21796,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Spine deformity\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Spine deformity\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-024-01019-2\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Spine deformity","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-024-01019-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究的目的是比较MCGR或PSF治疗的“tweener”患者的LIV选择。方法:对8-11岁接受MCGR或PSF治疗的门诊患者进行多中心儿童脊柱数据库查询,随访至少2年。评估LIV与术前脊柱高度、曲线大小和植入物类型的关系。评估触碰椎体(TV)、最后实质性触碰椎体(LSTV)、稳定椎体(SV)与LIV之间的关系。结果:159例患者符合纳入标准。两组术前曲线幅度相似(MCGR 68±19.0°vs PSF 66±17.2°,p = 0.6)。术前曲线大小与LIV相关,较大的曲线与更尾端的LIV相关(p = 0.0004)。与MCGR相比,PSF中LIV的分布更为多样。在43%的MCGR患者中L3为LIV,而在PSF患者中为27%。胸部LIV在PSF组中更为常见(PSF 13% vs MCGR 1.2%, p = 0.0038)。68%的PSF患者LIV位于SV的头部,而MCGR患者为48% (p = 0.02)。结论:大多数“tweener”患者的LIV选择在L3或以下,无论手术策略如何,可能是由曲线大小驱动的。然而,与接受MCGR治疗的患者相比,接受PSF治疗的“tweener”患者有更多的头侧LIV选择。在“中间”患者中选择MCGR和PSF时,应考虑潜在的LIV差异。证据水平:III。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
LIV selection in 'tweener' patients treated with magnetically controlled growing rods vs. posterior spinal fusion.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the LIV selection in 'tweener' patients treated with MCGR or PSF.

Methods: A multicenter pediatric spine database was queried for ambulatory patients ages 8-11 years treated by MCGR or PSF with at least 2-year follow-up. The relationship between the LIV and preoperative spinal height, curve magnitude, and implant type were assessed. The relationship between the touched vertebrae (TV), the last substantially touched vertebrae (LSTV), the stable vertebrae (SV), and the LIV were evaluated.

Results: One hundred and fifty-nine patients met inclusion criteria. Preoperative curve magnitude was similar between groups (MCGR 68 ± 19.0° vs. PSF 66 ± 17.2°, p = 0.6). Preoperative curve magnitude was associated with LIV, as larger curves were associated with a more caudal LIV (p = 0.0004). Distribution of the LIV was more varied in PSF compared to MCGR. L3 was the LIV in 43% of MCGR patients compared to 27% of PSF patients. A thoracic LIV was more common in the PSF group (PSF 13% vs. MCGR 1.2%, p = 0.0038). The LIV was cephalad to the SV in 68% of PSF compared to 48% of MCGR patients (p = 0.02).

Conclusion: The majority of LIV selection in 'tweener' patients was at L3 or below regardless of surgical strategy, likely driven by curve magnitude. However, 'tweener' patients treated with PSF had more cephalad LIV selections compared to patients treated with MCGR. Potential LIV differences should be considered when selecting MCGR vs. PSF in 'tweener' patients.

Level of evidence: III.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
18.80%
发文量
167
期刊介绍: Spine Deformity the official journal of the?Scoliosis Research Society is a peer-refereed publication to disseminate knowledge on basic science and clinical research into the?etiology?biomechanics?treatment?methods and outcomes of all types of?spinal deformities. The international members of the Editorial Board provide a worldwide perspective for the journal's area of interest.The?journal?will enhance the mission of the Society which is to foster the optimal care of all patients with?spine?deformities worldwide. Articles published in?Spine Deformity?are Medline indexed in PubMed.? The journal publishes original articles in the form of clinical and basic research. Spine Deformity will only publish studies that have institutional review board (IRB) or similar ethics committee approval for human and animal studies and have strictly observed these guidelines. The minimum follow-up period for follow-up clinical studies is 24 months.
期刊最新文献
Body mass index adjustments in children with early onset scoliosis: arm span BMI. Surgical site infection risk in neuromuscular scoliosis patients undergoing posterior spinal fusion. Pelvic asymmetry in children with neuromuscular scoliosis: a computed tomography-based 3D analysis. Editorial 13#2. Assessing blood volume returned with use of intraoperative cell salvage in adult spinal deformity correction.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1