Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

The efficacy of anterior vertebral body tethering in lenke type 6 curves for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Spine Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Spinal fusion is the standard treatment for severe forms of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). However, with the lowest instrumented vertebra that is usually located at L3 or L4, patients are prone to develop adjacent segment degeneration in the long term. Vertebral body tethering (VBT) as motion preserving technique has become an alternative for select patients with AIS. Several studies have presented the outcome after thoracic VBT but no study has analyzed the outcome after VBT for Lenke type 6 curves.

Methods

This is a retrospective single center data analysis of patients who have had bilateral VBT for Lenke type 6 curves and a minimum follow up of 24 months. Radiographic analysis was performed on several time points. Suspected tether breakages were additionally analyzed with respect to location and time at occurrence.

Results

25 patients were included. Immediate thoracic curve correction was 55.4% and 71.7% for TL/L curves. Loss of correction was higher for TL/L curves and resulted in a correction rate of 48.3% for thoracic curves and 48.9% for TL/L curves at 24 months post-operatively. 22 patients were suspected to have at least one segment with a tether breakage. Three patients required a re-VBT but no patient received posterior spinal fusion.

Conclusion

Bilateral VBT for Lenke type 6 curves is feasible and shows a significant curve correction for thoracic and TL/L curves at a minimum of 24 months post-operatively. Tether breakage rate and loss of correction remain an unfavorable observation that needs to be improved in the future.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Data is available.

Code availability

Not applicable.

References

  1. Trobisch PD, Ducoffe AR, Lonner BS, Errico TJ (2013) Choosing fusion levels in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 21:519–528

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. 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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Marks MC, Bastrom TP, Petcharaporn M et al (2015) The effect of time and fusion length on motion of the unfused lumbar segments in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine Deform 3:549–553

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Newton PO, Parent S, Myjani F et al (2022) Anterior vertebral body tethering compared with posterior spinal fusion for major thoracic curves: a retrospective comparison by the harms study group. J Bone Joint Surg Am 104:2170–2177

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Welborn MC, Blakemore L, Handford C et al (2023) Thoracolumbar curve behafior after selective thoracic anterior vertebral body tethering in Lenke 1A vs Lenke 1C curve patterns. Spine Deform 11:897–907

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Alanay A, Yucekul A, Abul K et al (2020) Thoracoscopic vertebral body tethering for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: follow-up curve behavior according to Sanders skeletal maturity staging. Spine 45:E1483–E1492

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Trobisch PD, Baroncini A (2021) Preliminary outcomes after vertebral body tethering (VBT) for lumbar curves and subanalysis of a 1-versus 2-tether construct. Eur Spine J 30:3570–3576

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Trobisch PD, Castelein R, Da Paz S (2023) Radiographic outcome after vertebral body tethering of the lumbar spine. Eur Spine J 32:1895–1900

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Nicolini LF, Kobbe P, Seggewiß J et al (2022) Motion preserving surgery for scoliosis with a vertebral body tethering system: a biomechanical study. Eur Spine J 31:1013–1021

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Baroncini A, Rodriguez L, Verma K, Trobisch PD (2021) Feasibility of single-staged bilateral anterior scoliosis correction in growing patients. Global Spine J 11:76–80

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Lenke LG, Betz RR, Harms J et al (2001) Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: A new classification to determine extent of spinal arthrodesis. J Bone Joint Surg 83:1169–1181

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Trobisch P, Baroncini A, Berrer A, Da Paz S (2022) Difference between radiographically suspected and intraoperatively confirmed tether breakages after vertebral body tethering for idiopathic scoliosis. Eur Spine J 31:1045–1050

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Bartley CE, Yaszay B, Bastrom TP et al (2017) Perioperative and delayed major complications following surgical treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 99:1206–1212

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Wang Y, Bünger CE, Zhang Y, Hansen ES (2012) Extensive fusion for Lenke 3c and 6c scoliosis: a two year radiographic follow-up. Int Orthop 36:795–801

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Kim YJ, Lenke LG, Bridwell KH et al (2007) Proximal junctional kyphosis in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis after 3 different types of posterior segmental spinal instrumentation and fusion: incidence and risk factor analysis of 410 cases. Spine 32:2731–2738

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Frantzen A, Suominen EN, Saarinen AJ et al (2023) Association between Lenke classification, the extend of lumbar spinal fusion, and health-related quality of life after instrumented spinal fusion for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 48:1216–1223

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Koller H, Enercan M, Decker S et al (2021) Resolution of the lumbosacral fractional curve and evaluation of the risk for adding on in 101 patients with posterior correction of Lenke 3, 4, and 6 curves. J Neurosurg Spine 35:471–485

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Larson AN, Marks MC, Gonzalez Sepulveda JM et al (2023) Non-fusion versus fusion surgery in pediatric idiopathic scoliosis: what trade-offs in outcomes are acceptable for the patient and family. J Bone Joint Surg Am. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.23.00503

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Trobisch P, Mahoney JM, Eichenlaub EK et al (2023) An investigation of range of motion preservation in fusionless anterior double screw and cord constructs for scoliosis correction. Eur Spine J 32:1173–1186

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Boeyer ME, Farid S, Wiesemann S, Hoernschemeyer DG (2023) Outcomes of vertebral body tethering in the lumbar spine. Spine Deform 11:909–918

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Baroncini A, Courvoisier A, Berjano P et al (2022) The effects of vertebral body tethering on sagittal parameters: evaluations from a 2-years follow-up. Eur Spine J 31:1060–1066

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Pehlivanoglu T, Oltulu I, Erdag Y (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 30:1896–1904

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Cherian D, Samdani AF, Schüpper AJ et al (2023) Early outcomes in hybrid fixation for idiopathic scoliosis: posterior fusion combined with anterior vertebral body tethering Patient series. J Neurosurg Case Lessons. 6:23331

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No funding was received/required for this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

PT: Lead investigator, Study design, Data analysis Draft of manuscript, Manuscript revision Final approval (includes revision) All authors agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. HK: Data analysis, Draft of Manuscript Manuscript revision, Final approval (includes revision) All authors agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. SDP: Data acquisition, Data analysis, Manuscript revision, Final approval, (includes revision) All authors agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. DC: Data analysis, Draft of Manuscript Manuscript revision, Final approval (includes revision) All authors agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Per D. Trobisch.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

PDT: Globus Medical (Consultant, Paid Lectures), Stryker Spine (Consultant), Triaspine (Paid Lectures), Spineguard (Paid Lectures), Zimvie (Paid Lectures) SDP: Globus Medical (Paid Lectures) HJK, DGC: nothing to disclose.

Ethical approval

This retrospective review was approved by the local ethics committee.

Consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 26 KB)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Trobisch, P.D., Kim, H.J., Da Paz, S. et al. The efficacy of anterior vertebral body tethering in lenke type 6 curves for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Eur Spine J (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-024-08300-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-024-08300-y

Keywords

Navigation