A comparison of three- and two-rod constructs in the correction of severe pediatric scoliosis
- PMID: 37034196
- PMCID: PMC10080239
- DOI: 10.1177/18632521231156438
A comparison of three- and two-rod constructs in the correction of severe pediatric scoliosis
Abstract
Purpose: Managing severe scoliosis is challenging and risky with a significant complication rate regardless of treatment strategy. In this retrospective comparative study, we report our results using a three-rod compared to two-rod construct in the surgical treatment of severe spine deformities to investigate which technique is safer, and which provides superior radiological outcomes.
Methods: Forty-six consecutive patients undergoing posterior spine fusion for scoliosis between 2006 and 2017 were identified in our institutional records. Inclusion criteria were minimum coronal deformity of 90°, age < 18 years at the time of surgery and a minimum 2 years of follow-up. Radiographic and clinical parameters, as well as post-operative complications were compared between the two groups.
Results: There were 21 patients in the three-rod group and 25 in the two-rod group. The mean preoperative major coronal deformity was 100°± 9 and 102°± 10 in the three-rod and two-rod, respectively (p = 0.6). The average major curve correction was 51% and 59% in three-rod and two-rod groups, respectively (p = 0.03). The post-operative thoracic kyphosis was 30°± 11 and 21°± 12 in the three-rod and the two-rod groups, respectively (p = 0.01). The surgical time was 476 ± 52 and 387 ± 84 min in three-rod and two-rod, respectively (p < 0.01). One patient in the two-rod cohort showed permanent post-operative sensory deficit. There were three unplanned returns to operating theater in the two-rod group.
Conclusions: Coronal correction was better with two-rod, whereas sagittal balance was superior with three-rod. Both techniques achieved balanced spine treating severe scoliosis. The two-rod technique was associated with a higher likelihood of requiring revision surgery.
Level of evidence: level 3.
Keywords: Severe scoliosis; posterior column osteotomy; posterior spinal fusion; skeletal traction; three-rod technique.
© The Author(s) 2023.
Conflict of interest statement
The author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Reinhard Zeller receives fellowship support from Stryker and SpineVision.
Figures
References
-
- Harrington PR. Treatment of scoliosis. Correction and internal fixation by spine instrumentation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1962; 44-A: 591-610. - PubMed
-
- Koerner JD, Patel A, Zhao C, et al. Blood loss during posterior spinal fusion for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 2014; 39: 1479–1487. - PubMed
-
- Yu X, Xiao H, Wang R, et al. Prediction of massive blood loss in scoliosis surgery from preoperative variables. Spine 2013; 38: 350–355. - PubMed
-
- Mihara Y, Chung WH, Chiu CK, et al. Perioperative outcome of severe idiopathic scoliosis (Cobb angle >/= 90°): is there any difference between “daytime” versus “after-hours” surgeries? Spine 2020; 45: 381–389. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Research Materials
