Abel De Varona-Cocero, Djani Robertson, Camryn Myers, Fares Ani, Constance Maglaras, Tina Raman, Themistocles Protopsaltis, Juan C Rodriguez-Olaverri
{"title":"哪种Lenke型曲线最适合青少年特发性脊柱侧凸的椎体系扎术?","authors":"Abel De Varona-Cocero, Djani Robertson, Camryn Myers, Fares Ani, Constance Maglaras, Tina Raman, Themistocles Protopsaltis, Juan C Rodriguez-Olaverri","doi":"10.1007/s43390-025-01049-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Clinical trials have studied the effects of curve magnitude and flexibility, age, and skeletal immaturity on the outcomes of VBT. No studies have assessed the effect of Lenke curve type on the outcomes of VBT. This study compares outcomes in patients who underwent VBT with Lenke type 1, 3, 5, and 6 curves.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Single center retrospective review of patients undergoing mini-open thoracoscopic-assisted two row vertebral body tethering (2RVBT) for the correction of AIS with a minimum 2-year follow-up were included. Patients were grouped by Lenke type, which yielded 4 groups; types 1, 3, 5, or 6. Analysis included preoperative demographic parameters, as well as radiographic and clinical outcome measures.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>156 2RVBT (Lenke 1, N = 61; Lenke 3, N = 35; Lenke 5, N = 37; Lenke 6, N = 23) patients met inclusion criteria. The mean preoperative apex Cobb angle in the Lenke type 1, 3, 5, and 6 groups were 50.2 ± 9.1, 50.5 ± 10.1, 45.0 ± 8.6, and 49.0 ± 10.8, respectively. This corrected to 21.2 ± 10.2, 19.2 ± 8.5, 13.6 ± 7.2, 18.5 ± 8.3 in Lenke type 1, 3, 5, and 6 groups, respectively, demonstrating that Lenke type 5 saw greatest correction following 2RVBT. With regards to revision recommendation following tether breakage, Lenke type 3 curves were most frequently indicated for fusion, whereas Lenke type 1 curves were most frequently not indicated for revision surgery.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Lenke type 5 curves are the most amenable to correction via 2RVBT, as evident by their lower post-operative apex Cobb angles and lowest rate of recommendation for revision to posterior spinal fusion.</p>","PeriodicalId":21796,"journal":{"name":"Spine deformity","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Which Lenke type curve is most appropriate for vertebral body tethering in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis?\",\"authors\":\"Abel De Varona-Cocero, Djani Robertson, Camryn Myers, Fares Ani, Constance Maglaras, Tina Raman, Themistocles Protopsaltis, Juan C Rodriguez-Olaverri\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s43390-025-01049-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Clinical trials have studied the effects of curve magnitude and flexibility, age, and skeletal immaturity on the outcomes of VBT. No studies have assessed the effect of Lenke curve type on the outcomes of VBT. This study compares outcomes in patients who underwent VBT with Lenke type 1, 3, 5, and 6 curves.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Single center retrospective review of patients undergoing mini-open thoracoscopic-assisted two row vertebral body tethering (2RVBT) for the correction of AIS with a minimum 2-year follow-up were included. Patients were grouped by Lenke type, which yielded 4 groups; types 1, 3, 5, or 6. Analysis included preoperative demographic parameters, as well as radiographic and clinical outcome measures.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>156 2RVBT (Lenke 1, N = 61; Lenke 3, N = 35; Lenke 5, N = 37; Lenke 6, N = 23) patients met inclusion criteria. The mean preoperative apex Cobb angle in the Lenke type 1, 3, 5, and 6 groups were 50.2 ± 9.1, 50.5 ± 10.1, 45.0 ± 8.6, and 49.0 ± 10.8, respectively. This corrected to 21.2 ± 10.2, 19.2 ± 8.5, 13.6 ± 7.2, 18.5 ± 8.3 in Lenke type 1, 3, 5, and 6 groups, respectively, demonstrating that Lenke type 5 saw greatest correction following 2RVBT. With regards to revision recommendation following tether breakage, Lenke type 3 curves were most frequently indicated for fusion, whereas Lenke type 1 curves were most frequently not indicated for revision surgery.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Lenke type 5 curves are the most amenable to correction via 2RVBT, as evident by their lower post-operative apex Cobb angles and lowest rate of recommendation for revision to posterior spinal fusion.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21796,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Spine deformity\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-21\",\"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/s43390-025-01049-4\",\"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/s43390-025-01049-4","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:临床试验研究了曲线大小和柔韧性、年龄和骨骼不成熟对VBT结果的影响。目前还没有研究评估Lenke曲线类型对VBT结果的影响。本研究比较了Lenke 1型、3型、5型和6型曲线患者行VBT的结果。方法:单中心回顾性分析采用微创胸腔镜辅助下两排椎体系栓(2RVBT)矫正AIS的患者,随访至少2年。患者按Lenke型分为4组;类型1、3、5或6。分析包括术前人口学参数,以及放射学和临床结果测量。结果:156 2RVBT (Lenke 1, N = 61;Lenke 3, N = 35;Lenke 5, N = 37;Lenke患者6例(N = 23)符合纳入标准。Lenke型1、3、5、6组患者术前尖端Cobb角平均值分别为50.2±9.1、50.5±10.1、45.0±8.6、49.0±10.8。Lenke 1、3、5、6组的校正值分别为21.2±10.2、19.2±8.5、13.6±7.2、18.5±8.3,表明Lenke 5型在2RVBT后校正最大。关于系索断裂后的翻修建议,Lenke 3型弯曲最常用于融合,而Lenke 1型弯曲最常不用于翻修手术。结论:Lenke 5型弯曲最适合通过2RVBT矫正,其术后顶点Cobb角较低,推荐后路脊柱融合翻修率最低。
Which Lenke type curve is most appropriate for vertebral body tethering in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis?
Purpose: Clinical trials have studied the effects of curve magnitude and flexibility, age, and skeletal immaturity on the outcomes of VBT. No studies have assessed the effect of Lenke curve type on the outcomes of VBT. This study compares outcomes in patients who underwent VBT with Lenke type 1, 3, 5, and 6 curves.
Methods: Single center retrospective review of patients undergoing mini-open thoracoscopic-assisted two row vertebral body tethering (2RVBT) for the correction of AIS with a minimum 2-year follow-up were included. Patients were grouped by Lenke type, which yielded 4 groups; types 1, 3, 5, or 6. Analysis included preoperative demographic parameters, as well as radiographic and clinical outcome measures.
Results: 156 2RVBT (Lenke 1, N = 61; Lenke 3, N = 35; Lenke 5, N = 37; Lenke 6, N = 23) patients met inclusion criteria. The mean preoperative apex Cobb angle in the Lenke type 1, 3, 5, and 6 groups were 50.2 ± 9.1, 50.5 ± 10.1, 45.0 ± 8.6, and 49.0 ± 10.8, respectively. This corrected to 21.2 ± 10.2, 19.2 ± 8.5, 13.6 ± 7.2, 18.5 ± 8.3 in Lenke type 1, 3, 5, and 6 groups, respectively, demonstrating that Lenke type 5 saw greatest correction following 2RVBT. With regards to revision recommendation following tether breakage, Lenke type 3 curves were most frequently indicated for fusion, whereas Lenke type 1 curves were most frequently not indicated for revision surgery.
Conclusion: Lenke type 5 curves are the most amenable to correction via 2RVBT, as evident by their lower post-operative apex Cobb angles and lowest rate of recommendation for revision to posterior spinal fusion.
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.