Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

Spine

SEGMENTAL VERSUS NON-SEGMENTAL THORACIC PEDICLE SCREWS IN ADOLESCENT IDIOPATHIC SCOLIOSIS: IS THERE ANY IMPLANT ALLOY EFFECT?

British Scoliosis Research Foundation (BSRF)



Abstract

Introduction

Thoracic pedicle screws have been proven to be safe and effective in the treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). However, the effect of the instrumentation alloy has not yet been investigated. We aimed to compare segmental versus non segmental thoracic pedicle screw instrumentation in patients with AIS.

Methods

A consecutive series of 143 patients with AIS (Lenke classification 1–4) surgically treated from 1998 to 2005 by means of thoracic pedicle screws were retrospectively reviewed. Considering implant density (number of fixation anchors placed per available anchors sites; segmental =60% [S], non-segmental =60% [NS]) and implant alloy used (titanium [Ti] vs stainless steel [SS]) we divided the cohort into four groups: Ti-S (48 cases); Ti-NS (34 cases); SS-S (35 cases); and SS-NS (26 cases). Groups were similar for preoperative mean age, sex distribution, Risser sign, main thoracic curve, and thoracic kyphosis. Pearson correlation coefficient and univariate analysis of variance were used.

Results

At a mean follow-up of 6·2 years (range 3–10) the overall final main thoracic curve correction was a mean of 61·4% (20–89), whereas the implant density within the major curve was 71% (15–100%). We recorded a significant correlation between implant density and percentage major curve correction (r=0·41, p<0·002); when the four groups were compared we noted that the SS-S group showed the greatest average correction (75%), followed by the Ti-S, SS-NS, and Ti-NS groups. We detected no significant differences between SS-S versus Ti-S versus SS-NS (r=0·002, p>0·05; r=0·13, p>0·05; r=0·07, p>0·01, respectively), whereas the Ti-NS group showed a statistically significant inferior percentage correction when compared with all other groups (average 52%; p<0·001). Nevertheless, no significant difference between groups was recorded on the SRS-30 assessment, showing a postoperative improvement in both self-image and satisfaction.

Conclusions

When an SS instrumentation is used, non-segmental pedicle screw constructs seem to be equally effective as segmental instrumentations in obtaining satisfactory results in patients with main thoracic AIS. When the implant alloy used is titanium, an implant density of greater than 60% should be guaranteed so as to achieve similar results to those recorded in this study.