Clinical Outcomes of Surgery in Young Patients With Spinal Deformity

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

Department of Orthopedic, Orthopedic Research Center, Imam Reza Hospital, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, IR Iran

Abstract

Background: Major spinal deformity can cause many adverse effects on the patients, body and soul leading to pain, decreased ability to do activity in daily living, and also depression.
 
Objectives: The present study aims to assess the quality of life among patients undergoing surgical treatment for spinal deformity, using SRS-30 questionnaire.
 
Patients and Methods: We retrospectively evaluated 48 young patients (26 females, 22 males) with major spinal deformity underwent definite surgical correction in our orthopedic department from August 2009 to August 2012. The mean age and follow-up period were 16.2 ± 2.8 years and 38.4 ± 8.8 months, respectively. Demographic characteristics were extracted from the medical records and SRS-30 questionnaire fulfilled pre-operatively and at the last follow-up visit. We used statistical package for social sciences (SPSS) version 13.0 for statistical analysis.
 
Results: Frequency of underlying diseases was congenital scoliosis in 22 (45.8%), idiopathic scoliosis 20 (41.7%), and Scheuermann’s kyphosis 6 (12.5%). Pain and function were relatively unchanged while surgery could significantly improve patient’s self-image, psychology, and satisfaction. Total SRS-30 score was also improved (P < 0.001). Patients’ age, sex, body mass index, educational status, or type of deformity did not correlate significantly with satisfaction or total SRS-30 score.
 
Conclusions: Surgical treatment of spinal deformity in the young regardless of the type of disease, can lead to significant improvements in health-related quality of life, as shown by self-image, psychology, and satisfaction in SRS-30 domain scores. Demographic data including sex, age, weight, height, and education were not correlated with the outcome.

Keywords

References

  1. 1.Gruca A. The pathogenesis and treatment of idiopathic scoliosis; a preliminary report. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1958;40-A(3):570–84.

    1. Haher TR, Gorup JM, Shin TM, Homel P, Merola AA, Grogan DP, et al. Results of the Scoliosis Research Society instrument for evaluation of surgical outcome in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. A multicenter study of 244 patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1999;24(14):1435–40.
    2. D'Andrea LP, Betz RR, Lenke LG, Clements DH, Lowe TG, Merola A, et al. Do radiographic parameters correlate with clinical outcomes in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis? Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000;25(14):1795–802.
    3. Wilson PL, Newton PO, Wenger DR, Haher T, Merola A, Lenke L, et al. A multicenter study analyzing the relationship of a standardized radiographic scoring system of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis and the Scoliosis Research Society outcomes instrument. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2002;27(18):2036–40.
    4. Merola AA, Haher TR, Brkaric M, Panagopoulos G, Mathur S, Kohani O, et al. A multicenter study of the outcomes of the surgical treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis using the Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) outcome instrument. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2002;27(18):2046–51.
    5. Danielsson AJ. What impact does spinal deformity correction for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis make on quality of life? Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007;32(19 Suppl):S101–8.
    6. Dickson JH, Mirkovic S, Noble PC, Nalty T, Erwin WD. Results of operative treatment of idiopathic scoliosis in adults. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1995;77(4):513–23.
    7. Dickson JH, Erwin WD, Rossi D. Harrington instrumentation and arthrodesis for idiopathic scoliosis. A twenty-one-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1990;72(5):678–83.
    8. Asher MA, Min Lai S, Burton DC. Further development and validation of the Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) outcomes instrument. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000;25(18):2381–6.
    9. Asher M, Min Lai S, Burton D, Manna B. Discrimination validity of the scoliosis research society-22 patient questionnaire: relationship to idiopathic scoliosis curve pattern and curve size. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003;28(1):74–8.
    10. Asher M, Min Lai S, Burton D, Manna B. The reliability and concurrent validity of the scoliosis research society-22 patient questionnaire for idiopathic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003;28(1):63–9.
    11. Grevitt M, Khazim R, Webb J, Mulholland R, Shepperd J. The short form-36 health survey questionnaire in spine surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1997;79(1):48–52.
    12. Garratt AM, Ruta DA, Abdalla MI, Buckingham JK, Russell IT. The SF36 health survey questionnaire: an outcome measure suitable for routine use within the NHS? BMJ. 1993;306(6890):1440–4.
    13. Sanders JO, Harrast JJ, Kuklo TR, Polly DW, Bridwell KH, Diab M, et al. The Spinal Appearance Questionnaire: results of reliability, validity, and responsiveness testing in patients with idiopathic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007;32(24):2719–22.
    14. Asher M, Min Lai S, Burton D, Manna B. Scoliosis research society-22 patient questionnaire: responsiveness to change associated with surgical treatment. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003;28(1):70–3.
    15. White SF, Asher MA, Lai SM, Burton DC. Patients' perceptions of overall function, pain, and appearance after primary posterior instrumentation and fusion for idiopathic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1999;24(16):1693–9.
    16. Watanabe K, Hasegawa K, Hirano T, Uchiyama S, Endo N. Use of the scoliosis research society outcomes instrument to evaluate patient outcome in untreated idiopathic scoliosis patients in Japan: part II: relation between spinal deformity and patient outcomes. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005;30(10):1202–5.
    17. Smucny M, Lubicky JP, Sanders JO, Carreon LY, Diab M. Patient self-assessment of appearance is improved more by all pedicle screw than by hybrid constructs in surgical treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2011; 36(3):248–54.
    18. Lubicky JP, Hanson JE, Riley EH, Spinal Deformity Study G. Instrumentation constructs in pediatric patients undergoing deformity correction correlated with Scoliosis Research Society scores. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2011;36(20):1692–700.
    19. Carreon LY, Sanders JO, Diab M, Sucato DJ, Sturm PF, Glassman SD, et al. The minimum clinically important difference in Scoliosis Research Society-22 Appearance, Activity, And Pain domains after surgical correction of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010;35(23):2079–83.
    20. Bridwell KH, Shufflebarger HL, Lenke LG, Lowe TG, Betz RR, Bassett GS. Parents' and patients' preferences and concerns in idiopathic adolescent scoliosis: a cross-sectional preoperative analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000;25(18):2392–9.
    21. Roberts DW, Savage JW, Schwartz DG, Carreon LY, Sucato DJ, Sanders JO, et al. Male-female differences in Scoliosis Research Society-30 scores in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2011;36(1):E53–9.
    22. Marks DS, Sayampanathan SR, Thompson AG, Piggott H. Longterm results of convex epiphysiodesis for congenital scoliosis. Eur Spine J. 1995;4(5):296–301.
    23. Dorward IG, Lenke LG, Stoker GE, Cho W, Koester LA, Sides BA. Radiographic and Clinical Outcomes of Posterior Column Osteotomies in Spinal Deformity Correction. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2014.
    24. Helenius I, Remes V, Lamberg T, Schlenzka D, Poussa M. Longterm health-related quality of life after surgery for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis and spondylolisthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90(6):1231–9.
    25. Danielsson AJ, Nachemson AL. Back pain and function 23 years after fusion for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a case-control study-part II. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003;28(18):E373–83.
    26. Takayama K, Nakamura H, Matsuda H. Low back pain in patients treated surgically for scoliosis: longer than sixteen-year followup. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009;34(20):2198–204.
    27. Helenius I, Remes V, Yrjonen T, Ylikoski M, Schlenzka D, Helenius M, et al. Harrington and Cotrel-Dubousset instrumentation in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Long-term functional and radiographic outcomes. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003;85-A(12):2303–9.
    28. Lenke LG, Bridwell KH, Baldus C, Blanke K, Schoenecker PL. Cotrel-Dubousset instrumentation for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1992;74(7):1056–67.
    29. Benli IT, Ates B, Akalin S, Citak M, Kaya A, Alanay A. Minimum 10 years follow-up surgical results of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients treated with TSRH instrumentation. Eur Spine J. 2007;16(3):381–91.
    30. Bas T, Franco N, Bas P, Bas JL. Pain and disability following fusion for idiopathic adolescent scoliosis: prevalence and associated factors. Evid Based Spine Care J. 2012;3(2):17–24.
Razavi International Journal of Medicine
Volume 2, Issue 4
October 2014

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics