Back to Search Start Over

Combined Anterior Thoracic Vertebral Body Tethering and Posterior Lumbar Tethering Results in Quicker Return to Sport and Activity Compared to Posterior Spinal Instrumented Fusion in Patients with Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis

Authors :
Oeding, Jacob F.
Siu, Jeremy
O’Donnell, Jennifer
Wu, Hao-Hua
Allahabadi, Sachin
Saggi, Satvir
Flores, Michael
Brown, Kelsey
Baldwin, Avionna
Diab, Mohammad
Source :
Global Spine Journal; 20240101, Issue: Preprints
Publication Year :
2024

Abstract

Study Design Retrospective comparative study.Objective To compare patient-reported physical activity between anterior thoracic vertebral body tethering and posterior lumbar spine tethering (ATVBT/PLST) and posterior spinal instrumentation and fusion (PSIF) with minimum 2 year follow-up.Methods Consecutive skeletally immature patients with idiopathic scoliosis and a thoracic and lumbar curve magnitude ≥40° who underwent either ATVBT/PLST or PSIF from 2015-2019 were included. The primary outcome was rate of returning to sport. Secondary outcomes included ability to bend and satisfaction with sport performance as well as weeks until return to sport, school, physical education (PE) classes, and running.Results Ten patients underwent ATVBT/PLST and 12 underwent PSIF. ATVBT/PLST patients reported significantly faster return to sport (13.5 weeks vs 27.9 weeks, P= .04), running (13.3 weeks vs 28.8 weeks, P= .02), and PE class (12.6 weeks vs 26.2 weeks, P= .04) compared to PSIF patients. ATVBT/PLST patients reported that they had to give up activities due to their ability to bend at lower rates than PSIF patients while reporting “no changes” in their ability to bend after surgery at higher rates than PSIF patients (0% vs 4% giving up activities and 70% vs 0% reporting no changes in bending ability for ATVBT/PLST and PSIF, respectively, P= .01). Compared to PSIF patients, ATVBT/PLST patients experienced less main thoracic and thoracolumbar/lumbar curve correction at most recent follow-up (thoracic: 41 ± 19% vs 69 ± 18%, P= .001; thoracolumbar/lumbar: 59 ± 25% vs 78 ± 15%, P= .02). No significant differences in the number of revision surgeries were observed between ATVBT/PLST and PSIF patients (4 (40%) and 1 (8%) for ATVBT/PLST and PSIF, respectively, P= .221).Conclusions ATVBT/PLST patients reported significantly faster rates of returning to sport, running, and PE. In addition, ATVBT/PLST patients were less likely to have to give up activities due to bending ability after surgery and reported no changes in their ability to bend after surgery more frequently than PSIF patients. However, the overall rate of return to the same or higher level of sport participation was high amongst both groups, with no significant difference observed between ATVBT/PLST and PSIF patients.

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
21925682 and 21925690
Issue :
Preprints
Database :
Supplemental Index
Journal :
Global Spine Journal
Publication Type :
Periodical
Accession number :
ejs66283626
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1177/21925682231222887