Abstract
Aims
The aim of this study was to compare outcomes after growth-friendly treatment for early-onset scoliosis (EOS) between patients with skeletal dysplasias versus those with other syndromes.
Methods
We retrospectively identified 20 patients with skeletal dysplasias and 292 with other syndromes (control group) who had completed surgical growth-friendly EOS treatment between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2018. We compared radiological parameters, complications, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) at mean follow-up of 8.6 years (SD 3.3) in the dysplasia group and 6.6 years (SD 2.6) in the control group.
Results
Mean major curve correction per patient did not differ significantly between the dysplasia group (43%) and the control group (28%; p = 0.087). Mean annual spinal height increase was less in the dysplasia group (9.3 mm (SD 5.1) than in the control group (16 mm (SD 9.2); p < 0.001). Mean annual spinal growth adjusted to patient preoperative standing height during the distraction period was 11% in the dysplasia group and 14% in the control group (p = 0.070). The complication rate was 1.6 times higher (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.3 to 2.0) in the dysplasia group. The following complications were more frequent in the dysplasia group: neurological injury (rate ratio (RR) 5.1 (95% CI 2.3 to 11)), deep surgical site infection (RR 2.2 (95% CI 1.2 to 4.1)), implant-related complications (RR 2.0 (95% CI 1.5 to 2.7)), and unplanned revision (RR 1.8 (95% CI 1.3 to 2.5)). Final fusion did not provide additional spinal height compared with watchful waiting (p = 0.054). There were no significant differences in HRQoL scores between the groups.
Conclusion
After growth-friendly EOS treatment, patients with skeletal dysplasias experienced a higher incidence of complications compared to those with other syndromes. Surgical growth-friendly treatment for skeletal dysplasia-associated EOS should be reserved for patients with severe, progressive deformities that are refractory to nonoperative treatment.
Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(6):596–602.
