The selection of a surgical strategy for the treatment of adult degenerative scoliosis with "pear-shaped" decompression under open spinal endoscopy.
Decompression
Minimally invasive
OSE
Spinal deformity
Surgical strategy
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 Jul 2024
11 Jul 2024
Historique:
received:
31
03
2024
accepted:
08
07
2024
medline:
12
7
2024
pubmed:
12
7
2024
entrez:
11
7
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The prognoses of patients who undergo open spinal endoscopy (OSE) decompression significantly differ by scoliosis type and symptom despite the use of uniform standards and procedures for the decompression surgery. These differences may be directly related to the selection and formulation of surgical strategies but their cause remains unclear. The aim of this study was to verify and evaluate the efficacy of the "Symptom, Stenosis and Segment classification (SSS classification)" in determining an appropriate surgical strategy and to analyze the differences in the outcomes of different patients after receiving the selected surgical strategy. The results of this study ultimately provide a theoretical basis for the specific optimization of surgical strategies guided by the "SSS classification". This work was a retrospective study. We reviewed 55 patients with scoliosis and spinal stenosis who underwent "pear-shaped" decompression under OSE from May 2021 to June 2023 treated by our surgical team. To classify different types of patients, we defined the "SSS classification" system. The permutation and combination of subtypes in Symptom (including three subtypes: Convex = v, Concave = c and Bilateral = b), Stenosis (including three subtypes: Convex = v, Concave = c and Bilateral = b), and Segment (including two subtypes: Edge = e and Inside = i) yields 18 possible types (details in Table 1) in this classification system. To classify different types of surgeries, we also defined the operation system. The VAS Back and VAS Leg scores after surgical treatment were significantly lower in all patients 3 months after surgery than before surgery. (**P < 0.05). The Svve type accounted for the greatest proportion of patients (62.50%) in the VAS back remission group, and the Scce type accounted for the greatest proportion (57.14%) in the VAS back ineffective group. According to the VAS leg score, the percentage of patients in whom Svve was detected in the VAS leg remission group reached 60.87%, and the percentage of patients in whom Svve was detected in the VAS leg ineffective group reached 44.44%. Svve accounted for the greatest proportion of cases (61.22%) in the JOA-effective group, and Scce accounted for the greatest proportion of cases (50.00%) in the JOA-ineffective group. In the JOA-effective group, the Ovv type accounted for the greatest proportion (up to 79.59%), while in the JOA-ineffective group, Occ and Ovv accounted for 50.00% of the cases each. The proportions of Svve type were the highest in the healthy group (up to 60.00%) and the ODI-effective group (up to 50.00%). The Ovv type accounted for the greatest proportion of patients in the ODI-effective group (up to 80.00%), and the Occ type accounted for the greatest proportion of patients in the ODI-ineffective group (up to 60.00%). Most of the surgical plans formulated by the "SSS classification" method were considered appropriate, and only when the symptoms of patients were located on the concave side did the endoscopic decompression plan used in the present study have a limited ability to alleviate symptoms.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38992132
doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-67003-y
pii: 10.1038/s41598-024-67003-y
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
16019Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Graham, R. B., Sugrue, P. A. & Koski, T. R. Adult degenerative scoliosis. Clin. Spine Surg. Spine Publ. 29, 95–107. https://doi.org/10.1097/bsd.0000000000000367 (2016).
doi: 10.1097/bsd.0000000000000367
Echt, M. et al. Comparison of minimally invasive decompression alone versus minimally invasive short-segment fusion in the setting of adult degenerative lumbar scoliosis: A propensity score-matched analysis. J. Neurosurg. Spine. https://doi.org/10.3171/2023.4.SPINE221047 (2023).
doi: 10.3171/2023.4.SPINE221047
pubmed: 37327145
Echt, M. et al. Decompression alone in the setting of adult degenerative lumbar scoliosis and stenosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Glob. Spine J. 13, 861–872. https://doi.org/10.1177/21925682221127955 (2023).
doi: 10.1177/21925682221127955
Li, P., Tong, Y., Chen, Y., Zhang, Z. & Song, Y. Comparison of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic decompression and short-segment fusion in the treatment of elderly degenerative lumbar scoliosis with spinal stenosis. BMC Musculoskelet. Disord. 22, 906. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-021-04804-6 (2021).
doi: 10.1186/s12891-021-04804-6
pubmed: 34711184
pmcid: 8555161
Salimi, H. et al. Mid-term changes in spinopelvic sagittal alignment in lumbar spinal stenosis with coexisting degenerative spondylolisthesis or scoliosis after minimally invasive lumbar decompression surgery: Minimum five-year follow-up. Spine J. 22, 819–826. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2021.11.012 (2022).
doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2021.11.012
pubmed: 34813957
Tozawa, K. et al. Surgical outcomes between posterior decompression alone and posterior decompression with fusion surgery among patients with Meyerding grade 2 degenerative spondylolisthesis: A multicenter cohort study. BMC Musculoskelet. Disord. 23, 902. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-022-05850-4 (2022).
doi: 10.1186/s12891-022-05850-4
pubmed: 36209211
pmcid: 9548127
Li, R., An, G., Guan, Y., Peng, Z. & Wang, Y. Minimally invasive interlaminar decompression with a 10-mm endoscope and microscope in cases of adult degenerative scoliosis. Pain Physician 24, E867–E875 (2021).
doi: 10.36076/ppj.2021.24.E867
pubmed: 34554707
Li, P., Shi, Z., Jiang, Y., Peng, Z. & Wang, Y. Clinical results of 10-mm endoscopic minimally invasive interlaminar decompression in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis with degenerative lumbar scoliosis and simple lumbar spinal stenosis. Clin. Interv. Aging 18, 911–919. https://doi.org/10.2147/CIA.S414559 (2023).
doi: 10.2147/CIA.S414559
pubmed: 37309521
pmcid: 10257922
Pritchett, J. W. & Bortel, D. T. Degenerative symptomatic lumbar scoliosis. Spine 18, 700–703. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199305000-00004 (1993).
doi: 10.1097/00007632-199305000-00004
pubmed: 8516697
Stoker, G. E. et al. Preoperative vitamin D status of adults undergoing surgical spinal fusion. Spine 38, 507–515. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e3182739ad1 (2013).
doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3182739ad1
pubmed: 22986835
Diebo, B. G. et al. Adult spinal deformity. Lancet 394, 160–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(19)31125-0 (2019).
doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(19)31125-0
pubmed: 31305254
Silva, F. E. & Lenke, L. G. Adult degenerative scoliosis: Evaluation and management. Neurosurg. Focus 28, E1. https://doi.org/10.3171/2010.1.Focus09271 (2010).
doi: 10.3171/2010.1.Focus09271
pubmed: 20192655
Ploumis, A., Transfledt, E. E. & Denis, F. Degenerative lumbar scoliosis associated with spinal stenosis. Spine J. 7, 428–436. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2006.07.015 (2007).
doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2006.07.015
pubmed: 17630141
Pérennou, D., Marcelli, C., Hérisson, C. & Simon, L. Epidemiologic aspects in a low-back pain population. Spine 19, 123–128. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199401001-00001 (1994).
doi: 10.1097/00007632-199401001-00001
pubmed: 8153817
Anand, N., Baron, E. M., Khandehroo, B. & Kahwaty, S. Long-term 2- to 5-year clinical and functional outcomes of minimally invasive surgery for adult scoliosis. Spine 38, 1566–1575. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e31829cb67a (2013).
doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31829cb67a
pubmed: 23715025
Khalife, M. et al. Lumbar scoliosis and stenosis: What outcomes for which treatment? Analysis of three surgical techniques in 154 patients with minimum two-year follow-up. Orthop. Traumatol. Surg. Res. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2023.103632 (2023).
doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2023.103632
pubmed: 37863186
Toyoda, H. et al. A decision tree analysis to predict clinical outcome of minimally invasive lumbar decompression surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis with and without coexisting spondylolisthesis and scoliosis. Spine J. 23, 973–981. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2023.01.023 (2023).
doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2023.01.023
pubmed: 36739978
Hou, Y. et al. The clinical effectiveness and complications of lumbar selective fenestration and concave-side fusion (LSFCF) in degenerative lumbar scoliosis (DLS) combined with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). BMC Surg. 22, 405. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-022-01842-2 (2022).
doi: 10.1186/s12893-022-01842-2
pubmed: 36419148
pmcid: 9682772