Motion preservation surgery for scoliosis with a vertebral body tethering system: a biomechanical study.
Curve correction
Fusionless
Growth modulation
Scoliosis
Vertebral body tethering
Journal
European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society
ISSN: 1432-0932
Titre abrégé: Eur Spine J
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9301980
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 2022
04 2022
Historique:
received:
19
04
2021
accepted:
14
10
2021
revised:
08
09
2021
pubmed:
31
10
2021
medline:
12
4
2022
entrez:
30
10
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
There is a paucity of studies on new vertebral body tethering (VBT) surgical constructs especially regarding their potentially motion-preserving ability. This study analyses their effects on the ROM of the spine. Human spines (T10-L3) were tested under pure moment in four different conditions: (1) native, (2) instrumented with one tether continuously connected in all vertebrae from T10 to L3, (3) additional instrumented with a second tether continuously connected in all vertebrae from T11 to L3, and (4) instrumented with one tether and one titanium rod (hybrid) attached to T12, L1 and L2. The instrumentation was inserted in the left lateral side. The intersegmental ROM was evaluated using a magnetic tracking system, and the medians were analysed. Please check and confirm the author names and initials are correct. Also, kindly confirm the details in the metadata are correct. The mentioned information is correct RESULTS: Compared to the native spine, the instrumented spine presented a reduction of less than 13% in global ROM considering flexion-extension and axial rotation. For left lateral bending, the median global ROM of the native spine (100%) significantly reduced to 74.6%, 66.4%, and 68.1% after testing one tether, two tethers and the hybrid construction, respectively. In these cases, the L1-L2 ROM was reduced to 68.3%, 58.5%, and 38.3%, respectively. In right lateral bending, the normalized global ROM of the spine with one tether, two tethers and the hybrid construction was 58.9%, 54.0%, and 56.6%, respectively. Considering the same order, the normalized L1-L2 ROM was 64.3%, 49.9%, and 35.3%, respectively. The investigated VBT techniques preserved global ROM of the spine in flexion-extension and axial rotation while reduced the ROM in lateral bending.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34716821
doi: 10.1007/s00586-021-07035-4
pii: 10.1007/s00586-021-07035-4
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1013-1021Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
Baroncini A, Rodriguez L, Verma K, Trobisch PD (2019) Feasibility of single-staged bilateral anterior scoliosis correction in growing patients. Glob Spine J. https://doi.org/10.1177/2192568219892904
doi: 10.1177/2192568219892904
Trobisch PD, Kobbe P, Baroncini A (2019) Dynamic scoliosis correction as alternative treatment for patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a non-fusion surgical technique. Z Orthop Unfall. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-0983-1265
doi: 10.1055/a-0983-1265
pubmed: 31533170
Samdani AF, Ames RJ, Kimball JS et al (2014) Anterior Vertebral Body Tethering for Idiopathic Scoliosis. Spine 39:1688–1693. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000000472
doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000472
pubmed: 24921854
Baker CE, Kiebzak GM, Neal KM (2021) Anterior vertebral body tethering shows mixed results at 2-year follow-up. Spine Deform 9:481–489. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-020-00226-x
doi: 10.1007/s43390-020-00226-x
pubmed: 33113121
Liu J, Li Z, Shen J, Xue X (2015) Spinal growth modulation with posterior unilateral elastic tether in immature swine model. Spine J 15:138–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2014.07.008
doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2014.07.008
pubmed: 25066626
Newton PO, Farnsworth CL, Faro FD et al (2008) Spinal growth modulation with an anterolateral flexible tether in an immature bovine model. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 33:724–733. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e31816950a0
doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31816950a0
Newton PO, Fricka KB, Lee SS et al (2002) Asymmetrical Flexible Tethering of Spine Growth in an Immature Bovine Model. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 27:689–693. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200204010-00004
doi: 10.1097/00007632-200204010-00004
Newton PO, Kluck DG, Saito W et al (2018) Anterior spinal growth tethering for skeletally immature patients with scoliosis. J Bone Jt Surg 100:1691–1697. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.18.00287
doi: 10.2106/JBJS.18.00287
Samdani AF, Ames RJ, Kimball JS et al (2015) Anterior vertebral body tethering for immature adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: one-year results on the first 32 patients. Eur Spine J 24:1533–1539. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-014-3706-z
doi: 10.1007/s00586-014-3706-z
pubmed: 25510515
Boudissa M, Eid A, Bourgeois E et al (2017) Early outcomes of spinal growth tethering for idiopathic scoliosis with a novel device: a prospective study with 2 years of follow-up. Child’s Nerv Syst 33:813–818. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00381-017-3367-4
doi: 10.1007/s00381-017-3367-4
Hoernschemeyer DG, Boeyer ME, Robertson ME et al (2020) Anterior vertebral body tethering for adolescent scoliosis with growth remaining. J Bone Jt Surg Publish Ah. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.19.00980
doi: 10.2106/JBJS.19.00980
Pehlivanoglu T, Oltulu I, Erdag Y et al (2021) Double-sided vertebral body tethering of double adolescent idiopathic scoliosis curves: radiographic outcomes of the first 13 patients with 2 years of follow-up. Eur Spine J. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-021-06745-z
doi: 10.1007/s00586-021-06745-z
pubmed: 33611658
Pehlivanoglu T, Oltulu I, Erdag Y et al (2021) Comparison of clinical and functional outcomes of vertebral body tethering to posterior spinal fusion in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis and evaluation of quality of life: preliminary results. Spine Deform. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-021-00323-5
doi: 10.1007/s43390-021-00323-5
pubmed: 33683642
Mehlman CT, Araghi A, Roy DR (1997) Hyphenated history: the Hueter-Volkmann law. Am J Orthop 26:798–800
pubmed: 9402217
Smit TH (2020) Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: The mechanobiology of differential growth. JOR SPINE. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsp2.1115
doi: 10.1002/jsp2.1115
pubmed: 33392452
pmcid: 7770204
Baroncini A, Trobisch PD, Migliorini F (2020) Learning curve for vertebral body tethering: analysis on 90 consecutive patients. Spine Deform. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-020-00191-5
doi: 10.1007/s43390-020-00191-5
pubmed: 32827085
Herren C, Beckmann A, Meyer S et al (2017) Biomechanical testing of a PEEK-based dynamic instrumentation device in a lumbar spine model. Clin Biomech 44:67–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2017.03.009
doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2017.03.009
Beckmann A, Nicolini LF, Grevenstein D et al (2020) Biomechanical in vitro test of a novel dynamic spinal stabilization system incorporating polycarbonate urethane material under physiological conditions. J Biomech Eng DOI 10(1115/1):4044242
Heuer F, Schmidt H, Klezl Z et al (2007) Stepwise reduction of functional spinal structures increase range of motion and change lordosis angle. J Biomech 40:271–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2006.01.007
doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2006.01.007
pubmed: 16524582
Beckmann A, Herren C, Mundt M et al (2018) A new in vitro spine test rig to track multiple vertebral motions under physiological conditions. Biomed Eng / Biomed Tech 63:341–347. https://doi.org/10.1515/bmt-2016-0173
doi: 10.1515/bmt-2016-0173
Wilke H-J, Claes L, Schmitt H, Wolf S (1994) A universal spine tester for in vitro experiments with muscle force simulation. Eur Spine J 3:91–97. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02221446
doi: 10.1007/BF02221446
pubmed: 7874556
Eschweiler J, Stromps J-P, Fischer M et al (2016) Development of a biomechanical model of the wrist joint for patient-specific model guided surgical therapy planning: Part 1. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part H J Eng Med 230:310–325. https://doi.org/10.1177/0954411916632791
doi: 10.1177/0954411916632791
Beckmann A, Herren C, Nicolini LF et al (2019) Biomechanical testing of a polycarbonate-urethane-based dynamic instrumentation system under physiological conditions. Clin Biomech 61:112–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2018.12.003
doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2018.12.003
Lavelle WF, Moldavsky M, Cai Y et al (2016) An initial biomechanical investigation of fusionless anterior tether constructs for controlled scoliosis correction. Spine J 16:408–413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2015.11.004
doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2015.11.004
pubmed: 26582489
Wilmanns N, Beckmann A, Nicolini LF, et al (2021) Biomechanical in vitro and finite element study on different sagittal alignment postures of the lumbar spine during multiaxial daily motion. Submitt to J Biomech Eng
Pehlivanoglu T, Oltulu I, Ofluoglu E et al (2020) Thoracoscopic vertebral body tethering for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a minimum of 2 years’ results of 21 patients. J Pediatr Orthop 40:575–580. https://doi.org/10.1097/BPO.0000000000001590
doi: 10.1097/BPO.0000000000001590
pubmed: 32427800
Alanay A, Yucekul A, Abul K et al (2020) Thoracoscopic Vertebral Body Tethering for Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Publish Ah. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000003643
doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000003643
Nohara A, Kawakami N, Seki K et al (2015) The effects of spinal fusion on lumbar disc degeneration in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a minimum 10-year follow-up. Spine Deform 3:462–468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jspd.2015.04.001
doi: 10.1016/j.jspd.2015.04.001
pubmed: 27927532
Rousseau M-A, Lazennec J-Y (2016) Degenerative disease supra- and infra-jacent to fused lumbar and lumbo-sacral levels. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 102:S1–S8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2015.12.003
doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2015.12.003
pubmed: 26797007
Schulte TL, Leistra F, Bullmann V et al (2007) Disc height reduction in adjacent segments and clinical outcome 10 years after lumbar 360° fusion. Eur Spine J 16:2152–2158. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-007-0515-7
doi: 10.1007/s00586-007-0515-7
pubmed: 17922149
pmcid: 2140131
Holewijn RM, de Kleuver M, van der Veen AJ et al (2017) A novel spinal implant for fusionless scoliosis correction: a biomechanical analysis of the motion preserving properties of a posterior periapical concave distraction device. Glob Spine J 7:400–409. https://doi.org/10.1177/2192568217699377
doi: 10.1177/2192568217699377