Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A comparison of idiopathic scoliosis surgery between teenage years and adulthood

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

Abstract

Purpose

Idiopathic scoliosis is an evolutive deformity during patient's life. In case of moderate deformity in a well aligned adolescent, it's a big concern to decide when to do the surgery. Objective of this work was to evaluate and compare clinical, radiological and surgical data of patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis operated in childhood (before 20 years) and those operated adults (after 35 years).

Methods

In this retrospective multicenter study, inclusion period extended from 2008 to 2018. Two groups were defined, those operated on before the age of 20 (YAIS), and those operated on after 35 years (OAIS). Demographic, radiographic and surgical data were collected. At follow-up, radiographic data and functional outcomes (VAS, SRS, SF12, Oswestry) were analyzed. Minimum FU was 5 years for young and 2 years for old patients.

Results

YAIS group included 364 patients, and OAIS group, 131 patients. In both groups, deformity was important (mean Cobb 63°). Vertebral osteotomies were significantly more frequent, fusions and length of stays were longer for old than young patients. Main Cobb correction was better in young than old (37 ± 10° vs 2 ± 13°, p = 0.03). Functional outcomes were better for young, operated patients than for operated groups after 35 years (SF12 PCS 50 ± 7 vs 39 ± 6, p = 0.02). The same trends were observed at longer follow-up.

Conclusion

Surgery for idiopathic scoliosis seems to offer a better quality of life and deformity correction when it is performed at adolescence. After 35 years, surgery remains an acceptable therapeutic option, despite higher complication rate.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Terran J, Schwab F, Shaffrey CI et al (2013) The SRS-Schwab adult spinal deformity classification: assessment and clinical correlations based on a prospective operative and nonoperative cohort. Neurosurgery 73:559–568. https://doi.org/10.1227/NEU.0000000000000012

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Schwab F, Dubey A, Pagala M et al (2003) Adult scoliosis: a health assessment analysis by SF-36. Spine 28:602–606. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.BRS.0000049924.94414.BB

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Lonner BS, Ren Y, Bess S et al (2019) Surgery for the adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients after skeletal maturity: early versus late surgery. Spine Deform 7:84–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jspd.2018.05.012

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Louer C, Yaszay B, Cross M et al (2019) Ten-year outcomes of selective fusions for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. J Bone Jt Surg Am 101:761–770. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.18.01013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Helenius L, Diarbakerli E, Grauers A et al (2019) Back pain and quality of life after surgical treatment for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis at 5-year follow-up: comparison with healthy controls and patients with untreated idiopathic scoliosis. J Bone Jt Surg Am 101:1460–1466. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.18.01370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Diarbakerli E, Grauers A, Danielsson A, Gerdhem P (2018) Health-related quality of life in adulthood in untreated and treated individuals with adolescent or juvenile idiopathic scoliosis. J Bone Jt Surg Am 100:811–817. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.17.00822

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bridwell KH, Shufflebarger HL, Lenke LG et al (2000) Parents’ and patients’ preferences and concerns in idiopathic adolescent scoliosis: a cross-sectional preoperative analysis. Spine 25:2392–2399. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200009150-00020

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Faro FD, Marks MC, Pawelek J, Newton PO (2004) Evaluation of a functional position for lateral radiograph acquisition in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 29:2284–2289

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Vialle R, Levassor N, Rillardon L et al (2005) Radiographic analysis of the sagittal alignment and balance of the spine in asymptomatic subjects. J Bone Jt Surg Am 87:260–267. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.D.02043

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Smith JS, Klineberg E, Schwab F et al (2013) Change in classification grade by the SRS-Schwab adult spinal deformity classification predicts impact on health-related quality of life measures: prospective analysis of operative and nonoperative treatment. Spine 38:1663–1671. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e31829ec563

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. 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 fusions: incidence and risk factor analysis of 410 cases. Spine 32:2731–2738. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e31815a7ead

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Maillot C, Ferrero E, Fort D et al (2015) Reproducibility and repeatability of a new computerized software for sagittal spinopelvic and scoliosis curvature radiologic measurements: Keops(®). Eur Spine J Off Publ Eur Spine Soc Eur Spinal Deform Soc Eur Sect Cerv Spine Res Soc 24:1574–1581. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-015-3817-1

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Pesenti S, Jouve J-L, Morin C et al (2015) Evolution of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: results of a multicenter study at 20 years’ follow-up. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res OTSR 101:619–622. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2015.05.004

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Smith JS, Shaffrey CI, Glassman SD et al (2011) Risk-benefit assessment of surgery for adult scoliosis: an analysis based on patient age. Spine 36:817–824. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181e21783

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Danielsson AJ, Nachemson AL (2003) Back pain and function 23 years after fusion for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a case-control study-part II. Spine 28:E373-383. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.BRS.0000084267.41183.75

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Sanchez-Raya J, Bago J, Pellise F et al (2012) Does the lower instrumented vertebra have an effect on lumbar mobility, subjective perception of trunk flexibility, and quality of life in patients with idiopathic scoliosis treated by spinal fusion? J Spinal Disord Tech 25:437–442. https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0b013e3182318622

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lonner BS, Ren Y, Newton PO et al (2017) Risk factors of proximal junctional kyphosis in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis—the pelvis and other considerations. Spine Deform 5:181–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jspd.2016.10.003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Lee GA, Betz RR, Clements DH, Huss GK (1999) Proximal kyphosis after posterior spinal fusion in patients with idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 24:795–799. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199904150-00011

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Smith JS, Shaffrey CI, Berven S et al (2009) Operative versus nonoperative treatment of leg pain in adults with scoliosis: a retrospective review of a prospective multicenter database with two-year follow-up. Spine 34:1693–1698. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181ac5fcd

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Smith JS, Shaffrey CI, Berven S et al (2009) Improvement of back pain with operative and nonoperative treatment in adults with scoliosis. Neurosurgery 65:86–93; discussion 93–94. https://doi.org/10.1227/01.NEU.0000347005.35282.6C

Download references

Funding

The authors have not disclosed any funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Orthopedic and Spine Surgery Department, Hopital Européen Georges Pompidou, Université Paris Cité, Paris, France

    Marion Stencel-Allemand, Marc Khalife & Emmanuelle Ferrero

  2. Orthopedic Surgery Department, Hopital Pitié Salpétrière, Université Paris Sorbonne, Paris, France

    Laura Marie-Hardy

  3. Orthopedic Pediatric Department, Hopital Robert Debré, Université Paris Cité, Paris, France

    Adele Happiette & Brice Ilharreborde

  4. Orthopedic Surgery Department, Hopital St Joseph, Paris, France

    Pierre-Emmanuel Moreau

Authors
  1. Marion Stencel-Allemand
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Laura Marie-Hardy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marc Khalife
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Adele Happiette
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Pierre-Emmanuel Moreau
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Brice Ilharreborde
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Emmanuelle Ferrero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Emmanuelle Ferrero study design redaction, Brice Ilharreborde study objective and review, Marion Stencel-Allemand and Adele Happiette data collection, Marion Stencel-Allemand, redaction, Marc Khalife statistial analysis and review, Laura Marie-Hardy and Pierre-Emmanuel Moreau data collection and review.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Emmanuelle Ferrero.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

E Ferrero: consulting for Implanet and Medtronic. B Ilharreborde: consulting for Implanet, Zimmer Biomet and Medtronic. M Khalifé: stock options in Novaspine. MSA, LMH, AH, PEM had no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

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

Stencel-Allemand, M., Marie-Hardy, L., Khalife, M. et al. A comparison of idiopathic scoliosis surgery between teenage years and adulthood. Eur Spine J (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-024-08211-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-024-08211-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation