COMPARATIVE STUDY
EVALUATION STUDIES
JOURNAL ARTICLE
REVIEW
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Results of thoracoscopic instrumented fusion versus conventional posterior instrumented fusion in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis undergoing selective thoracic fusion.

Spine 2004 September 16
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of 31 consecutive female patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis undergoing selective thoracic fusion.

OBJECTIVE: To compare safety and efficacy of two techniques in treating adolescent idiopathic scoliosis undergoing selective thoracic fusion.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: There is paucity in the literature comparing posterior versus thoracoscopic instrumented fusion in scoliosis.

METHODS: Nineteen patients (group 1) underwent posterior instrumented fusion. Twelve patients (group 2) had thoracoscopic anterior instrumented fusion. All patients had a minimum of 25 months of follow-up observation.

RESULTS: Both groups were similar in terms of age at menarche and surgery. Preoperative Cobb angles in the coronal (erect and bending) and sagittal planes did not differ between the two groups. Group 1 patients had higher estimated blood loss (P = 0.006). Operative time (P < 0.001) and intensive care unit stay (P = 0.01) were longer in group 2 patients. There was no difference in parenteral analgesia requirement. There were no complications in group 1. Complications in group 2 included lobar collapse (1) and scapula winging (1). Improvement in scoliosis among group 1 patients averaged 77 (1 week), 72 (6 months), and 67% (most recent follow-up review). In group 2 patients, mean improvement in scoliosis was 66 (1 week), 62 (6 months), and 62% (most recent follow-up review). The differences between the two groups in terms of scoliosis improvement were not significant. Thoracic kyphosis (T2-T12) did not increase significantly with thoracoscopic versus posterior instrumentation. No significant change in lumbar lordosis (T12-S1) was noted with either procedure.

CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of thoracoscopic surgery was similar to standard posterior procedures. Advantages included lower intraoperative blood loss. The longer operative time and intensive care unit stay were attributed to the steep learning curve of this technique.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app