Abstract
Purpose
To examine correlation between postoperative radiographic and cosmetic improvements in Lenke 1C adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) with patients’ self-rated outcomes of health and disability at follow-up as determined by the Scoliosis Research Society questionnaire (SRS-30), Oswestry Disability Index score (ODI) and measure of overall health quality Euroqol-5d (EQ-5D).
Methods
24 Lenke 1C scoliosis patients, mean age 16.5 (12.8–38.1) years, treated with posterior pedicle screw-only construct, were included. The coronal profile indices (radiographic and cosmetic) regarding magnitude of spinal deformity and truncal balance were measured preoperatively, postoperatively and at final follow-up. A comprehensive index of overall back symmetry was also measured by means of the Posterior Trunk Symmetry Index (POTSI). Pearson’s correlation analysis determined the association between the radiographic–cosmetic indices and patient-rated outcomes.
Results
Mean follow-up for the cohort was 4.4 (±1.86) years. The thoracic apical vertebra-first thoracic vertebra horizontal distance (AV-TI) correction had significant correlation with function, self-image, and mental health SRS-30 scores (0.55, 0.54, 0.66). Similarly, thoracic apical vertebra horizontal translation from central sacral vertical line (AV-CSVL) correction at follow-up had significant correlation with self-image and management domains (0.57, 0.50). Follow-up POTSI correlated well with SRS-30 and EQ-5D scores (r = −0.64, −0.54). Postoperative leftward trunk shift/spinal imbalance did not influence overall cosmesis and outcomes; significant spinal realignment was evident in follow-up resulting in physiological balance and acceptable cosmesis and outcomes.
Conclusion
Significant, but less than “perfect” correlations were observed between the radiographic, cosmetic measures and patient-rated outcomes. Thoracic AV-CSVL, AV-T1 correction and POTSI associated significantly with SRS-30 scores. Whereas, thoracic Cobb angle, Cobb correction, and coronal balance did not correlate with any patient-rated outcome measure. It is, therefore, inferred that the patients-rated subjective outcomes are only poorly reflected by the objectively measured radiographic and cosmetic measures of deformity correction.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Shindle M, Khanna A, Bhatnagar R, Sponseller P (2006) Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: modern management guidelines. J Surg Orthop Adv 15(1):43–52
Negrini S, Grivas T, Kotwicki T, Maruyama T, Rigo M, Weiss H (2006) Why do we treat adolescent idiopathic scoliosis? What we want to obtain and to avoid for our patients. SOSORT 2005 Consensus paper. Scoliosis 1(1):4
MacLean WE Jr, Green NE, Pierre CB, Ray DC (1989) Stress and coping with scoliosis: psychological effects on adolescents and their families. J Pediatr Orthop 9(3):257–261
Asher M, Lai SM, Burton D, Manna B (2004) The influence of spine and trunk deformity on preoperative idiopathic scoliosis patients’ health-related quality of life questionnaire responses. Spine 29(8):861–868
Bengtsson G, Fällström K, Jansson B, Nachemson A (1974) A psychological and psychiatric investigation of the adjustment of female scoliosis patients. Acta Psychiatr Scand 50(1):50–59
Payne WK III, Ogilvie JW, Resnick MD, Kane RL, Transfeldt EE, Blum RW (1997) Does scoliosis have a psychological impact and does gender make a difference? Spine 22(12):1380–1384
Haher TR, Merola A, Zipnick RI, Gorup J, Mannor D, Orchowski J (1995) Meta-analysis of surgical outcome in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a 35-year English literature review of 11,000 patients. Spine 20(14):1575–1584
Edwards CC, Lenke LG, Peelle M, Sides B, Rinella A, Bridwell KH (2004) Selective thoracic fusion for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis with C modifier lumbar curves: 2- to 16-year radiographic and clinical results. Spine 29(5):536–546
Lenke LG, Betz RR, Bridwell KH, Harms J, Clements DH, Lowe TG (1999) Spontaneous lumbar curve coronal correction after selective anterior or posterior thoracic fusion in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 24(16):1663–1672
Trobisch PD, Samdani AF, Pahys JM, Cahill PJ (2011) Postoperative trunk shift in Lenke 1 and 2 curves: how common is it? and analysis of risk factors. Eur Spine J 20(7):1137–1140
Theologis TN, Jefferson RJ, Simpson AH, Turner-Smith AR, Fairbank JC (1993) Quantifying the cosmetic defect of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 18(7):909–912
Iwahara T, Imai M, Atsuta Y (1998) Quantification of cosmesis for patients affected by adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Eur Spine J 7(1):12–15
Sørensen J, Davidsen M, Gudex C, Pedersen KM, Brønnum-Hansen H (2009) Danish EQ-5D population norms. Scand J Public Health 37(5):467–474
Richards BS, Scaduto A, Vanderhave K, Browne R (2005) Assessment of trunk balance in thoracic scoliosis. Spine 30(14):1621–1626
Wang Y, Bünger CE, Wu C, Zhang Y, Hansen ES (2012) Postoperative trunk shift in Lenke 1C scoliosis: what causes it? How can it be prevented? Spine 37(19):1676–1682
Wang Y, Bunger CE, Zhang Y, Wu C, Hansen ES (2012) Postoperative spinal alignment remodeling in Lenke 1C scoliosis treated with selective thoracic fusion. Spine J 12(1):73–80. doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2011.10.024
Parent E, Damaraju S, Hill D, Lou E, Smetaniuk D (2010) Identifying the best surface topography parameters for detecting idiopathic scoliosis curve progression. Stud Heal Technol Inform 158:78–82
Mínguez MF, Buendía M, Cibrián RM, Salvador R, Laguía M, Martín A, Gomar F (2007) Quantifier variables of the back surface deformity obtained with a noninvasive structured light method: evaluation of their usefulness in idiopathic scoliosis diagnosis. Eur Spine J 16(1):73–82
Patias P, Grivas TB, Kaspiris A, Aggouris C, Drakoutos E (2010) A review of the trunk surface metrics used as Scoliosis and other deformities evaluation indices. Scoliosis 5(1):12
Koch KD, Buchanan R, Birch JG, Morton AA, Gatchel RJ, Browne RH (2001) Adolescents undergoing surgery for idiopathic scoliosis: how physical and psychological characteristics relate to patient satisfaction with the cosmetic result. Spine 26(19):2119–2124
Merola AA, Haher TR, Brkaric M, Panagopoulos G, Mathur S, Kohani O, Lowe TG, Lenke LG, Wenger DR, Newton PO (2002) A multicenter study of the outcomes of the surgical treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis using the Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) outcome instrument. Spine 27(18):2046–2051
Smith PL, Donaldson S, Hedden D, Alman B, Howard A, Stephens D, Wright JG (2006) Parents’ and patients’ perceptions of postoperative appearance in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 31(20):2367–2374. doi:10.1097/01.brs.0000240204.98960.dd
Danielsson AJ, Wiklund I, Pehrsson K, Nachemson AL (2001) Health-related quality of life in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a matched follow-up at least 20 years after treatment with brace or surgery. Eur Spine J 10(4):278–288
Asher M, Lai SM, Burton D, Manna B (2002) Spine deformity correlates better than trunk deformity with idiopathic scoliosis patients’ quality of life questionnaire responses. Stud Heal Technol Inform 91:462
Dubousset J (2011) Reflections of an orthopaedic surgeon on patient care and research into the condition of scoliosis. J Pediatr Orthop 31:S1–S8. doi:10.1097/Bpo.0b013e3181f73beb
Mahaudens P, Detrembleur C, Mousny M, Banse X (2009) Gait in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: energy cost analysis. Eur Spine J 18(8):1160–1168. doi:10.1007/s00586-009-1002-0
Nault ML, Allard P, Hinse S, Le Blanc R, Caron O, Labelle H, Sadeghi H (2002) Relations between standing stability and body posture parameters in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 27(17):1911–1917. doi:10.1097/01.Brs.000025720.91214.Db
Sawatzky B, Tredwell S, Sanderson D (1997) Postural control and trunk imbalance following Cotrel-Dubousset instrumentation for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Gait Posture 5(2):116–119
Theologis TN, Fairbank JC, Turner-Smith AR, Pantazopoulos T (1997) Early detection of progression in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis by measurement of changes in back shape with the Integrated Shape Imaging System scanner. Spine 22(11):1223–1228
Sanders JO, Polly DW, Cats-Baril W, Jones J, Lenke LG, O’Brien MF, Richards BS, Sucato DJ, Study ASSD (2003) Analysis of patient and parent assessment of deformity in idiopathic scoliosis using the Walter Reed Visual Assessment Scale. Spine 28(18):2158–2163. doi:10.1097/01.Brs.0000084629.97042.0b
Pratt RK, Burwell RG, Cole AA, Webb JK (2002) Patient and parental perception of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis before and after surgery in comparison with surface and radiographic measurements. Spine 27(14):1543–1550. doi:10.1097/01.Brs.0000018494.53295.06
Asher M, Min Lai S, Burton D, Manna B (2003) Discrimination validity of the scoliosis research society-22 patient questionnaire: relationship to idiopathic scoliosis curve pattern and curve size. Spine 28(1):74–78. doi:10.1097/01.BRS.0000047636.95839.F5
King HA, Moe JH, Bradford DS, Winter RB (1983) The selection of fusion levels in thoracic idiopathic scoliosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 65(9):1302–1313
Puno RM, An KC, Puno RL, Jacob A, Chung SS (2003) Treatment recommendations for idiopathic scoliosis : an assessment of the Lenke classification. Spine 28(18):2102–2114
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to offer their gratitude to Ms Pia Crone Madsen at the clinical photograph audiovisual department, Ms Lone Sand Simonsen and Ms Linda Nygaard for the follow-up of the patients. We would also like to thank Ms Linda Nygaard for her help in revising the manuscript.
Conflict of interest
This work was part of the Cost Effectiveness Spine Project (www.cespine.dk) which received support from the Danish Strategic Research Council (grant no. 2142-08-0017)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sharma, S., Bünger, C.E., Andersen, T. et al. Do postoperative radiographically verified technical success, improved cosmesis, and trunk shift corroborate with patient-reported outcomes in Lenke 1C adolescent idiopathic scoliosis?. Eur Spine J 24, 1462–1472 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-014-3688-x
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-014-3688-x