Fusion rates based on type of bone graft substitute using minimally invasive scoliosis surgery for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis

BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2023 Jan 14;24(1):30. doi: 10.1186/s12891-023-06134-1.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive scoliosis surgery (MISS) is currently introduced on novel technique for surgical treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). This study is aimed to evaluate the efficacy of facet fusion in MISS compared to posterior fusion in conventional open scoliosis surgery (COSS) and compare facet fusion rates based on three bone graft substitutes in MISS for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS).

METHODS: Eighty six AIS patients who underwent scoliosis surgery were divided into two groups: the COSS group and the MISS group. COSS was performed through posterior fusion with allograft. MISS was applied via facet fusion with three bone graft substitutes. The MISS group was further divided into three subgroups based on graft substitute: Group A (allograft), Group B (demineralized bone matrix [DBM]), and group C (demineralized cancellous bone chips). Fusion rate was measured using conventional radiographs to visualize loss of correction > 10°, presence of lysis around implants, breaks in fusion mass, and abnormal mobility of the fused segment.

RESULTS: The fusion rates showed no significant difference in COSS and MISS groups (p = 0.070). In the MISS group, the fusion rates were 85, 100, and 100% in groups A, B, and C, respectively, with no significant difference (p = 0.221). There were no statistical differences between groups A, B, and C in terms of correction rate, fusion rate, and SRS-22 scores (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS: The facet fusion in MISS showed comparable to posterior fusion in COSS with regard to radiological and clinical outcomes. Furthermore, the type of graft substitute among allograft, DBM, and demineralized cancellous bone chips did not affect facet fusion rate or clinical outcomes in MISS. Therefore, MISS showed comparable fusion rate (with no influences on the type of graft substitute) and clinical outcomes to those of COSS in the surgical treatment of AIS.

PMID:36639795 | PMC:PMC9840254 | DOI:10.1186/s12891-023-06134-1

Share:

Related Posts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Generated by Feedzy