Skip to main content
Log in

Comparison of Anteroposterior to Posterior-Only Correction of Scheuermann’s Kyphosis: A Matched-Pair Radiographic Analysis of 92 Patients

  • Case Series
  • Published:
Spine Deformity Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Study Design

Retrospective radiographic benchmark study.

Objective

To evaluate the amount of instrumented correction obtained from a combined anterior/posterior (A/P) versus posterior-only (post-only) approach for Scheuermann’s kyphosis.

Summary of Background Data

An A/P approach was thought to optimize correction; however, instrumentation advances using pedicle screws allow treatment through an all-posterior approach.

Methods

A total of 166 Scheuermann’s kyphosis patients were treated between 2 centers: 90 by combined A/P approach at 1 center and 76 by post-only at the second center. From the 166 patients, a matched cohort of 92 (46 from each) was established according to preoperative sagittal (±10°) and hyperextension (HE) Cobb (±10°) measurements and matched for age and gender.

Results

In the matched-pair group, average preoperative sagittal Cobb angles were 75.9° for the A/P group versus 78.8° for the post-only group (p =.2). The HE Cobb angles were similar (52.4° vs. 51.1°; p =.6). They showed similar corrections (33.7° vs. 30.6°; p =.3) and postoperative Cobb measurements (43.4° vs. 47.1°; p =.2) as well. The number of fusion levels was 9 in the A/P group and 12 in the post-only group; the difference yielded significance (p =.02).

Conclusions

The A/P and post-only approaches averaged similar degrees of correction. The A/P patients were likely to correct more than their preoperative HE sagittal Cobb measurement, whereas the post-only group corrected close to their preoperative HE measurement. The number of fusion levels was larger with the post-only group.

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.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Huang EY, Acosta JM, Gardocki RJ, et al. Thoracoscopic anterior spinal release and fusion: evolution of a faster, improved approach. J Pediatr Surg 2002;37:1732–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Hutter J, Miller K, Moritz E. Chronic sequels after thoracoscopic procedures for benign diseases. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2000;17:687–90.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Hutter J, Reich-Weinberger S, Hitzl W, et al. Sequels 10 years after thoracoscopic procedures for benign disease. Eur J Cardiothoracic Surg 2007;32:409–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Iwasaki A, Hamatake D, Shirakusa T. Biosorbable poly-L-lactide rib-connecting pins may reduce acute pain after thoracotomy. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2004;52:49–53.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Izatt MT, Harvey JR, Adam CJ, et al. Recovery of pulmonary function following endoscopic anterior scoliosis correction: evaluation at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2006;31: 2469–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Jackson RJ, Gokaslan ZL. Spinal-pelvic fixation in patients with lumbosacral neoplasms. J Neurosurg 2000;92:61–70.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Dajczman E, Gordon A, Kreisman H, et al. Long-term postthoracot-omy pain. Chest 1991;99:270–4.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Bomback DA, Charles G, Widmann R, et al. Video-assisted thoraco-scopic surgery compared with thoracotomy: early and late follow-up of radiographic and functional outcome. Spine J 2007;7:399–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Jansen RC, van Rhijn LW, Duinkerke E, et al. Predictability of the spontaneous lumbar curve correction after selective thoracic fusion in idiopathic scoliosis. Eur Spine J 2007;16:1335–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Di Silvestre M, Greggi T, Giacomini S, et al. Surgical treatment for scoliosis in Marfan syndrome. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2005;30: E597–604.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Boonstra TA, van der Kooij H, Munneke M, et al. Gait disorders and balance disturbances in Parkinson’s disease: clinical update and pathophysiology. Curr Opin Neurol 2008;21:461–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Herrera-Soto JA, Parikh SN, Al-Sayyad MJ, et al. Experience with combined video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) anterior spinal release and posterior spinal fusion in Scheuermann’s kyphosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2005;30:2176–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Briem D, Windolf J, Lehmann W, et al. Bone grafts endoscopically applied to the spine: results of anterior fusion and therapeutic consequences. Unfallchirurg 2004;107:1152–61.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Burd TA, Pawelek L, Lenke LG. Upper extremity functional assessment after anterior spinal fusion via thoracotomy for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: prospective study of twenty-five patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2002;27:65–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Cerfolio RJ, Price TN, Bryant AS, et al. Intracostal sutures decrease the pain of thoracotomy. Ann Thorac Surg 2003;76:407–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Graham EJ, Lenke LG, Lowe TG, et al. Prospective pulmonary function evaluation following open thoracotomy for anterior spinal fusion in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2000;25: 2319–25.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Chang KW, Chang KI, Wu CM. Enhanced capacity for spontaneous correction of lumbar curve in the treatment of major thoracic-compensatory C modifier lumbar curve pattern in idiopathic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2007;32:3020–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Hempfing A, Völpel HJ, Metz-Stavnehagen P. Concave thoracoplasty (CTP) and posterior instrumentation for correction of rigid thoracic scoliosis: results at 4-6 years. Paper presented at: 37th annual meeting of the Scoliosis Research Society; September 19-22, 2002; Seattle, WA.

    Google Scholar 

  19. De Paepe A, Devereux RB, Dietz HC, et al. Revised diagnostic criteria for the Marfan syndrome. Am J Med Genet 1996;62:417–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Koller H, Juliane Z, Umstaetter M, et al. Surgical treatment of Scheuermann’s kyphosis using a combined antero-posterior strategy and pedicle screw constructs: efficacy, radiographic and clinical outcomes in 111 cases. Eur Spine J 2014;23:180–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Tsirikos AI, Jain AK. Scheuermann’s kyphosis: current controversies. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2011;93:857–65.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Tsutsui S, Pawelek JB, Bastrom TP, et al. Do discs “open” anteriorly with posterior-only correction of Scheuermann’s kyphosis? Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2011;36:E1086–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Geck MJ, Macagno A, Ponte A, et al. The Ponte procedure: posterior only treatment of Scheuermann’s kyphosis using segmental posterior shortening and pedicle screw instrumentation. J Spinal Disord Tech 2007;20:586–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Lee SS, Lenke LG, Kuklo TR, et al. Comparison of Scheuermann kyphosis correction by posterior-only thoracic pedicle screw fixation versus combined anterior/posterior fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2006;31:2316–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Lenke LG, Rinella A, Kim Y. Freehand thoracic pedicle screw placement. Semin Spine Surg Spinal Instrumentation 2002;14:48–57.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Cho KJ, Lenke LG, Bridwell KH, et al. Selection of the optimal distal fusion level in posterior instrumentation and fusion for thoracic hy-perkyphosis: the sagittal stable vertebra concept. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2009;34:765–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Sugrue PA, O’shaughnessy BA, Blanke KM, Lenke LG. Rapidly progressive Scheuermann’s disease in an adolescent following pectus bar placement treated with posterior vertebral column resection: case report and review of literature. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2013;38: E259–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Lonner BS, Newton P, Betz R, et al. Operative management of Scheuermann’s kyphosis in 78 patients: radiographic outcomes, complications, and technique. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2007;32:2644–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Kim YB, Lenke LG, Kim YJ, et al. The morbidity of an anterior thor-acolumbar approach: adult spinal deformity patients with greater than five-year follow-up. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2009;34:822–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Mac-Thiong JM, Labelle H, Berthonnaud E, et al. Sagittal spinopel-vic balance in normal children and adolescents. Eur Spine J 2007;16: 227–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Boulay C, Tardieu C, Hecquet J, et al. Sagittal alignment of spine and pelvis: regulated by pelvic incidence: standard values and prediction of lordosis. Eur Spine J 2006;15:415–22.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Lafage V, Schwab F, Vira S, et al. Spino-pelvic parameters after surgery can be predicted: a preliminary formula and validation of standing alignment. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2011;36:1037–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Mac-Thiong JM, Labelle H, Roussouly P. Pediatric sagittal alignment. Eur Spine J 2011;20(suppl 5):586–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lawrence G. Lenke MD.

Additional information

The Department of Orthopaedic SurgeryeSpine Service, Washington University, received grant monies from Axial Biotech, DePuy Synthes Spine, a National Institutes of Health grant (2010e2015), and AOSpine, the Scoliosis Research Society, and Norton Healthcare, Louisville, KY (Scoli-RISK-1 study); philanthropic research funding from the Fox Family Foundation (Prospective Pediatric Spinal Deformity study); and fellowship funding from AOSpine North America (funds/fellow year).

Author disclosures: HK (none); LGL (patents with Medtronic [unpaid]; consultant for DePuy Synthes Spine, K2M, Medtronic [monies donated to a charitable foundation]; royalties from Medtronic, Quality Medical Publishing; reimbursement for meetings/courses from AOSpine, Broad-Water, DePuy Synthes Spine, K2M, Medtronic, Scoliosis Research Society, Seattle Science Foundation, Stryker Spine, The Spinal Research Foundation; OM (none); JZ (none); MU (none); AH (none); WH (none); KHB (none); LAK (none).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Koller, H., Lenke, L.G., Meier, O. et al. Comparison of Anteroposterior to Posterior-Only Correction of Scheuermann’s Kyphosis: A Matched-Pair Radiographic Analysis of 92 Patients. Spine Deform 3, 192–198 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jspd.2014.09.048

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jspd.2014.09.048

Keywords

Navigation